Page 41 - The Indian EYE 061226

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 An attorney who knowingly petition has been withdrawn.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