AILA’s Advocacy Action Center allows you to advocate for legislative and policy reforms consistent with AILA’s principles and priorities.
Get InvolvedThe brand-new 18th edition of Kurzban's Immigration Law Sourcebook is now shipping.
Order NowLearn how to tackle challenges like finding and retaining affordable staff, working better in a hybrid or remote environment, when and how to raise fees, and much more.
Register NowAILALink puts an entire immigration law library at your fingertips! Search the AILALink database for all your practice needs—statutes, regs, case law, agency guidance, publications, and more.
AILA Doc. No. 20051930 | Dated May 19, 2020 | File Size: 698 K
Download the DocumentAfter rejecting some Forms I-140 that included e-certified ETA-9089s or blue ETA-9089s with electronically reproduced signatures, USCIS announced that it will ask petitioners to resubmit their Form I-140 with the blue Form 9089s or e-certified ETA-9089s with either wet original signatures and/or scanned copies of signatures, and a copy of the rejection notice. In the event the petitioner’s inadvertently rejected ETA-9089 expired between March 20 and May 18, 2020, USCIS will accept the re-filed Form I-140 petition along with the inadvertently rejected, expired ETA-9089 during the national emergency.
AILA has received reports from members of some I-140 petitions that have been rejected by the Dallas Lockbox due to lack of a “valid Labor Certification” even though a valid labor certification was included with the petition. AILA had reached out to DOL, the Lockbox, and to USCIS regarding these reports.
[[To print the PDF on this page please use the print function in the PDF reader.]]
Cite as AILA Doc. No. 20051930.
Open the DocumentAmerican Immigration Lawyers Association
1331 G Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Copyright © 1993-
American Immigration Lawyers Association.
AILA.org should not be relied upon as the exclusive source for your legal research. Nothing on AILA.org constitutes legal advice, and information on AILA.org is not a substitute for independent legal advice based on a thorough review and analysis of the facts of each individual case, and independent research based on statutory and regulatory authorities, case law, policy guidance, and for procedural issues, federal government websites.