Basic HTML Version

|  | Table of Contents |  | View Full Version

Page 41 - The Indian EYE 061226
P. 41

    IMMIGRATION                                                              JUNE 12, 2026     |  The Indian Eye 41

                The concern, however, arises when   questionable awards, or strategically ar-  ty under federal penal statutes such as 18   or willful misrepresentation even after a
            strategy  becomes  so  standardized  that   ranged  judging  opportunities,  require   USC 1001. An attorney who knowingly   petition  has  been  withdrawn.  Although
            evidence  begins  to  appear  curated  for   close review when their claims seem ex-  assists their client in submitting such ma-  the case arose in the H-1B context, the
            immigration purposes rather than reflec-  aggerated, unsupported, or unrelated to   terial can also be charged criminally with   AAO’s reasoning rests upon broader US-
            tive  of  genuine  professional  distinction.   genuine  professional  recognition.  The   aiding or abetting conspiracy. Moreover,   CIS authority and immigration principles
            Extraordinary  ability  petitions  are  not   fact  that  similar  evidence  succeeded  in   the attorney would also be violating their   that are not confined to a single visa cat-
            intended  to  function  as  checklist  exer-  earlier  cases  does  not  make  it  reliable,   ethical obligations under the state analog   egory. For evidence-driven petitions such
            cises. The inquiry is not whether a ben-  and meeting a regulatory category does   of ABA Model Rule 3.3 and pursuant to   as EB-1 and O-1 filings—where eligibil-
            eficiary has assembled the same evidence   not prove the underlying claims are true.   8 CFR 1003.102(c) for knowingly mak-  ity often turns on documentary submis-
            discussed online or obtained credentials   When factual assertions cannot be inde-  ing a false statement, which is part of the   sions—the practical implication is difficult
            others  have  successfully  relied  upon.   pendently verified, the issue is no longer   federal  rules  that  sanction  immigration   to ignore: withdrawal may not necessarily
            Rather, the relevant question is whether   just evidentiary weakness, but credibility.   practitioners.   resolve concerns arising from unsupport-
            the  evidence  persuasively  demonstrates   The  USCIS  can  potentially  charge  the   Recent  developments  further  rein-  ed or misleading evidence once it enters
            that  this  beneficiary  has  attained  sus-  noncitizen  applicant  with  fraud  or  mis-  force the importance of evidentiary cred-  the  administrative  record.  The  decision
            tained  acclaim,  distinction,  or  extraor-  representation,  which  would  result  in   ibility in extraordinary ability petitions. In   serves  as  an  important  reminder  that,
            dinary  achievement  within  the  field.  permanent inadmissibility under section   Matter of Texperts, Inc., 29 I&N Dec. 491   in  evidence-driven  petitions,  credibility
                Recurring evidence is not inherently   212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Immigration and   (AAO 2026), the Administrative Appeals   concerns may outlast the petition itself.
            weak or improper, and beneficiaries need   Nationality Act (INA). Knowingly, sub-  Office issued a significant precedent deci-
            not avoid it simply because others have   mitting fraudulent material about one’s   sion confirming that USCIS may contin-  *Manjeeta Chowdhary is an Associate
            used it successfully. The problem is not   credentials can also incur criminal liabili-  ue to preserve findings relating to fraud   at Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC.
            repetition, but the use of evidence cho-  ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
            sen mainly to satisfy a regulatory category   Cyrus D. Mehta, a graduate of Cambridge University and Columbia Law School, is the Managing Partner of Cyrus D. Mehta
            rather than to reflect genuine profession-  & Partners PLLC in New York City. Mr. Mehta is a member of AILA’s Administrative Litigation Task Force; AILA’s EB-5 Com-
            al  distinction.  That  is  when  credibility   mittee; former chair of AILA’s Ethics Committee; special counsel on immigration matters to the Departmental Disciplinary
            concerns begin to arise, especially if the   Committee, Appellate Division, First Department, New York; member of the ABA Commission on Immigration; board member
            supporting  evidence  is  exaggerated,  un-  of Volunteers for Legal Services and board member of New York Immigration Coalition.  Mr. Mehta is the former chair of the
            supported,  or  detached  from  authentic   Board of Trustees of the American Immigration Council and former chair of the Committee on Immigration and Nationality
                                              Law of the New York City Bar Association. He is a frequent speaker and writer on various immigration-related issues, including
            recognition in the field.         on ethics, and is also an adjunct professor of law at Brooklyn Law School, where he teaches a course entitled Immigration and
                This issue also raises ethical con-  Work.  Mr. Mehta received the AILA 2018 Edith Lowenstein Memorial Award for advancing the practice of immigration law
            cerns.  Immigration  attorneys  must   and the AILA 2011 Michael Maggio Memorial Award for his outstanding efforts in providing pro bono representation in the
            critically  evaluate  evidence,  not  sim-  immigration field. He has also received two AILA Presidential Commendations in 2010 and 2016.  Mr. Mehta is ranked among
            ply  compile  it.  Third-party  materials,   the most highly regarded lawyers in North America by Who’s Who Legal – Corporate Immigration Law 2019 and is also ranked
            particularly  publicity-driven  articles,  in Chambers USA and Chambers Global 2019 in immigration law, among other rankings.

                                                                   www.TheIndianEYE.com

| 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 |