Arvian Immigration Law Firm

Arvian Immigration Law Firm Arvian Law Firm
✨New beginning starts with Arvian
- Green Card
- Family reunion
- Work visas
- Citizenship
📞+1 (213) 838 0095
✉️ [email protected]

🇺🇸 The October Visa Bulletin has been released with important changes in the family-based and employment-based categorie...
10/02/2026

🇺🇸 The October Visa Bulletin has been released with important changes in the family-based and employment-based categories.

The Department of State published the October 2026 Visa Bulletin on September 29, just two days before the start of the new fiscal year. The agency did not explain the reason for the delay.

❗️ October 1 marks the beginning of the new fiscal year in the U.S., when new annual immigrant visa numbers become available.

🔹 For F2A, the category for spouses and unmarried children under 21 of U.S. permanent residents, the filing category is fully open. If you meet the requirements for Adjustment of Status, you can file Form I-485 regardless of your priority date;

🔹 For EB-1, the category remains current. If you meet the requirements for AOS, you can file Form I-140 together with your I-485;

🔹 For EB-2, including EB-2 NIW, applicants with a priority date earlier than March 15, 2026, will be able to file an I-485 in October;

🔹 For EB-3 skilled workers and professionals, the filing date is August 1, 2024, while for other workers, it is June 1, 2022.

Dates for Filing determine when you can file your application. Final Action Dates determine when your Green Card can be finally approved or an immigrant visa can be issued.

⚠️ In October, USCIS has authorized the use of the Dates for Filing chart, so applicants filing an I-485 from within the U.S. should use this chart. Final approval will depend on visa availability under the Final Action Dates chart.

If you are in the U.S. and want to evaluate your chances of obtaining an EB-1 or EB-2 visa, contact us. We offer a free case evaluation.

🇺🇸 Can you use money earned in the U.S. to make an E-2 visa investment?We are often asked whether money earned in the U....
09/30/2026

🇺🇸 Can you use money earned in the U.S. to make an E-2 visa investment?

We are often asked whether money earned in the U.S. can be used for an E-2 investment and shown as the initial investment in a business.

👉 Yes, it can, as long as the funds were obtained lawfully and you can document their source. For an E-2 visa, the source of the investment does not have to be outside the U.S.

Income earned in the U.S. can be documented with tax returns, W-2s or 1099s, bank statements, pay stubs, and other documents showing where the money came from and that it belongs to the investor.

✅ The funds must then actually be invested in the business and placed at commercial risk. Money simply sitting in a bank account and not yet committed to launching or purchasing the business does not qualify as an E-2 investment.

For an E-2 visa, you also need to show that:
🔹 the applicant is a national of a country that has a treaty with the U.S.;
🔹 the investment has already been made or is in the process of being made and is substantial in relation to the specific business;
🔹 the applicant has control of the company and will direct and develop the business;
🔹 the business is not a marginal enterprise, meaning it must have the ability to generate more than just enough income to support the investor and their family, or have the capacity to make a significant economic contribution;
🔹 the applicant’s presence in the U.S. is connected to directing and developing the business.

Lawfully earned money in the U.S. can be used for an E-2 investment if you can document its source, properly make the investment, and meet the other E-2 visa requirements.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

🇺🇸 Appeals court limits deportations of immigrants to third countries.On September 18, the First Circuit upheld a decisi...
09/24/2026

🇺🇸 Appeals court limits deportations of immigrants to third countries.

On September 18, the First Circuit upheld a decision in D.V.D. v. DHS, finding unlawful a process for quickly deporting people to countries that were not identified in their removal orders or during prior proceedings.

🔹 DHS policy allowed a person with a final removal order to be sent to another country. If the State Department determined that the country had provided sufficient diplomatic assurances that the person would not be persecuted or tortured, DHS could carry out the removal without an additional process allowing the person to raise a fear of persecution or torture.

🔹 If no such assurances were available, ICE provided notice of removal approximately 24 hours in advance. The court found that this did not provide a meaningful opportunity to protect the person’s rights.

🔹 Before removing someone to a third country, DHS must tell the person where they are being sent and provide a meaningful opportunity to raise a claim that they face persecution or torture in that country.

The court’s decision applies to people with final removal orders, including those who were previously granted withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture with respect to a specific country.

👉 On September 21, The Deportation Project published the results of an investigation into this practice and reported that since 2025, the administration has entered into agreements with 35 countries allowing people to be deported there even though they are not citizens of those countries and may have no connection to them.

At least $410 million was allocated for these agreements and related programs. According to data collected by the journalists, 25,447 people had already been sent to third countries as of August 31, 2026.

🇺🇸 BIA allows DHS to use other asylum applicants’ declarations to evaluate your credibility.The BIA issued a new precede...
09/22/2026

🇺🇸 BIA allows DHS to use other asylum applicants’ declarations to evaluate your credibility.

The BIA issued a new precedent decision, Matter of V-S-A-, expanding DHS’s ability to use declarations from other asylum cases when evaluating the credibility of a specific applicant’s claim.

🔹 In the case, the applicant was granted asylum by an Immigration Judge. DHS appealed the decision and submitted 12 declarations from other cases, arguing that they contained substantial similarities to the applicant’s story, including similar wording, structure, and factual details.

🔹 The names and other personally identifying information in those declarations were redacted. The Immigration Judge declined to give the documents significant weight because of privacy concerns and because the applicant had no opportunity to cross-examine the people who had submitted the declarations. The judge ultimately found the applicant credible and granted asylum.

🔹 The BIA reversed that decision and held that redacting personally identifying information is sufficient to protect the privacy of other asylum applicants. DHS may use such documents to compare the language and circumstances of different cases.

The people whose declarations are used for comparison do not have to appear in Immigration Court for cross-examination because their declarations are not being used to prove that the events described actually happened. They are being used to identify similarities between different declarations.

⚠️ Similar wording in asylum declarations does not automatically result in a denial or mean that the applicant’s story is fabricated. The applicant must be given meaningful notice of the similarities and a reasonable opportunity to explain them, and the Immigration Judge must consider the totality of the circumstances.

Even genuine stories can raise additional questions if the wording, sequence of events, or details are too similar to declarations submitted by other applicants.

👉 An Immigration Judge can no longer exclude these materials simply because the identities of the other applicants have been redacted or because those applicants cannot be called to court for cross-examination.

⚡️ 22 states and Washington, D.C. have sued over the new Public Charge rules.On September 14, a coalition of 22 states a...
09/18/2026

⚡️ 22 states and Washington, D.C. have sued over the new Public Charge rules.

On September 14, a coalition of 22 states and Washington, D.C. filed a federal lawsuit challenging the new Public Charge rules, which are scheduled to take effect on September 18, 2026.

⚠️ The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare the new DHS policy unlawful and block its implementation. They argue that the agency has given immigration officers too much discretion to consider the use of public benefits when reviewing Green Card applications.

Starting September 18, USCIS will be able to consider Medicaid, SNAP, housing, food, and other assistance for which eligibility depends on an applicant’s income or financial circumstances. Receiving these benefits may become one of the factors considered in a Green Card denial.

The states argue that the new rule exceeds DHS’s authority, violates federal administrative law, and does not provide sufficiently clear limits on immigration officers’ discretion.

❗️ A separate lawsuit challenging the same rules was also filed by New York City, Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, Santa Clara County, and King County. Local officials argue that the new policy could cause families to forgo healthcare, food assistance, and other benefits because of concerns about their future Green Card eligibility.

As of publication, the court had not issued a preliminary injunction or otherwise paused the new rules while the lawsuits are pending. The effective date remains September 18.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

🇺🇸 There are only a few days left before the new Public Charge rules take effect. They will take effect on September 18,...
09/15/2026

🇺🇸 There are only a few days left before the new Public Charge rules take effect. They will take effect on September 18, 2026, and will apply to I-485 applications filed by mail or online on or after that date.

After September 18, officers will consider the receipt of Medicaid and Medi-Cal, SNAP, housing assistance, financial aid for education, and other programs for which eligibility depends on income or financial circumstances.

❗️ If you are planning to file an I-485, check which benefits you are currently receiving. If you are able to stop receiving Medicaid/Medi-Cal, SNAP, or other benefits, try to do so before September 18 and keep proof that your benefits were terminated or that you contacted the appropriate agency.

Benefits received before September 18 will be evaluated under the old rules. Under those rules, USCIS considers cash assistance and long-term institutionalization at government expense.

⚠️ Receiving Medicaid, SNAP, or another covered benefit after September 18 could become a reason for a Green Card denial. The officer will consider factors including your age, health, family status, income, assets, education, skills, the length of time you received benefits, the amount of assistance received, and more.

If you are already eligible to file an I-485 and your application package is complete, you should make every effort to file before September 18. These applications will continue to be evaluated under the old Public Charge rules.

Benefits received by a spouse, children, or other family members are not considered benefits received by the applicant. Asylees, refugees, VAWA applicants, and T/U and SIJ applicants are exempt from the Public Charge test.

✅ If you stop receiving benefits, keep the termination letter, electronic confirmation, termination request, or other documentation that you can provide to USCIS if necessary.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

🇺🇸 DOJ requires all state government agencies to share immigration data with DHS.On September 1, the DOJ changed its int...
09/11/2026

🇺🇸 DOJ requires all state government agencies to share immigration data with DHS.

On September 1, the DOJ changed its interpretation of a 1996 federal law. States participating in the TANF and SSI programs must provide DHS with information about individuals whom state government agencies know to be in the U.S. without lawful status.

Since 1998, this requirement had been interpreted differently and applied only to state agencies directly involved in administering public benefits. The DOJ has now revoked that interpretation and determined that the requirement applies to all state government agencies.

🔹 Federal law requires states to provide DHS with names, addresses, and other identifying information at least four times a year, as well as additional information upon DHS request.

🔹 DOJ has broadened its interpretation of when a state agency can be considered to have knowledge that a person lacks lawful status in the U.S. A final removal order is no longer considered necessary for this purpose.

🔹 DOJ also takes the position that a state agency cannot intentionally ignore information available to it in order to avoid its obligation to share data with DHS.

Now, information must be shared with DHS not only by public benefits agencies, but also by other state government institutions, including DMVs, universities, police departments, and health agencies.

✅ All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and several U.S. territories participate in TANF and SSI. TANF alone receives more than $16.4 billion in federal funding each year.

DOJ warned that a state’s failure to comply with federal law could have consequences, including the loss of federal funding.

⭐️ We received Green Card approvals for three of our clients who were in the U.S. through the U4U.👉 The most interesting...
09/09/2026

⭐️ We received Green Card approvals for three of our clients who were in the U.S. through the U4U.

👉 The most interesting case was that of one of our clients. In 2024, we filed an EB-1A petition for her, received approval, and filed her I-485 for a Green Card through Adjustment of Status later that same year.

We had to wait for a decision until 2026. In February, our client was called in for a Green Card interview, and about two weeks after the interview, USCIS sent her a NOID — a Notice of Intent to Deny.

⚠️ USCIS gave only one reason: our client was in the U.S. through U4U and, according to the officer, therefore was not eligible to obtain a Green Card through Adjustment of Status.

We disagreed with this position, prepared a response to the NOID, and explained in detail why our client’s U4U status did not prevent her from obtaining a Green Card through AOS.

More than two years after filing the I-485, and several months after responding to the NOID, USCIS approved her Green Card.

❗️ Therefore, the statement that a person on U4U cannot obtain a Green Card through AOS is incorrect.

Our experience shows that it is possible to obtain a Green Card from within the U.S. without leaving the country, including after USCIS initially intended to deny the case specifically because of U4U.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

🇺🇸 USCIS now has the authority to check the credit history of financial sponsors on Form I-864.🔹 On August 31, USCIS int...
09/04/2026

🇺🇸 USCIS now has the authority to check the credit history of financial sponsors on Form I-864.

🔹 On August 31, USCIS introduced a new edition of Form I-864, Affidavit of Support. Financial sponsors now authorize USCIS and the Department of State to request information from consumer reporting agencies, including credit reports and credit scores, to verify their financial circumstances.

🔹 The new edition allows government agencies to obtain financial information directly from credit bureaus. USCIS does not currently require sponsors to submit a credit report with Form I-864.

The agency has not yet published criteria for evaluating credit scores or established a minimum credit score.

⚠️ The addition of this authorization to the form suggests that debts, late payments, bankruptcies, low credit scores, and other information from a sponsor’s credit history may be considered when evaluating the sponsor’s ability to meet their financial obligations.

A low credit score has not been established as a reason for denial. USCIS also has not explained how much weight a sponsor’s credit history will carry compared with income, assets, and other financial factors.

❗️ If a sponsor has a credit or security freeze on their credit report, USCIS may not be able to obtain the necessary information. The agency warns that this could delay case processing and recommends lifting the freeze after receiving a request for information.

Sponsors must still meet the required income threshold of at least 125% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines, or use qualifying assets, household member income, or a joint sponsor.

USCIS also updated Forms I-864A and I-864EZ. The new editions are dated 08/24/26.

As of August 31, USCIS accepts only the new edition. There is no transition period. USCIS will reject the 10/17/24 edition of Form I-864 if it is mailed or filed online on or after August 31.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

🇺🇸 Federal court lifts the DV-2026 freeze and orders the government to resume processing cases.On August 28, a federal c...
09/02/2026

🇺🇸 Federal court lifts the DV-2026 freeze and orders the government to resume processing cases.

On August 28, a federal court in California lifted the restrictions that had led USCIS and the Department of State to pause processing cases for DV-2026 winners.

The court lifted three policies:
🔹 the USCIS hold on pending Form I-485 applications for DV-2026 winners in the U.S.;
🔹 the Department of State’s suspension of DV-2026 visa issuance;
🔹 a separate suspension of immigrant visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries, which also affected some DV-2026 winners.

USCIS must resume processing pending DV-2026 I-485 applications without applying the freeze.

The Department of State must resume processing cases at U.S. consulates and reconsider cases that were denied solely because of the DV-2026 suspension or the 75-country restriction.

✅ The court certified three classes of applicants, so the protection applies not only to the people who directly filed the lawsuit. The classes include DV-2026 winners and their family members whose cases were affected by the USCIS Hold, DV Pause, or 75-Country Pause.

DV-2026 winners must receive their visa or complete AOS by September 30, 2026, when the fiscal year ends. After that date, winning the DV-2026 lottery will no longer provide a path to obtaining a visa or Green Card.

❗️ The court’s decision does not guarantee an interview, approval, or visa issuance. The court did not set a specific deadline for processing individual cases.

USCIS and U.S. consulates will continue to review eligibility for the program, inadmissibility issues, background check results, and the availability of visa numbers.

The court ordered the Trump administration and the plaintiffs to submit a report by September 18 on compliance with the decision and the status of case processing.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

Address

300 Spectrum Center Drive, Floor 4
Los Angeles, CA
92618

Opening Hours

Monday 9am - 6pm
Tuesday 9am - 6pm
Wednesday 9am - 6pm
Thursday 9am - 6pm
Friday 9am - 6pm

Telephone

+12138380095

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Arvian Immigration Law Firm posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share

Category