(a) Under section 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA or Act) (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A)), certain aliens may not obtain immigrant visas for entrance into the United States in order to engage in permanent employment unless the Secretary of Labor has first certified to the Secretary of State and to the Secretary of Homeland Security that:
(1) There are not sufficient United States workers who are able, willing, qualified and available at the time of application for a visa and admission into the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform the work; and
(2) The employment of the alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of United States workers similarly employed.
(b) The regulations under this part set forth the procedures through which such immigrant labor certifications may be applied for, and granted or denied.
(c) Correspondence and questions about the regulations in this part should be addressed to: Office of Foreign Labor Certification, Employment and Training Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room C-4312, Washington, DC 20210.
[69 FR 77386, Dec. 27, 2004, as amended at 71 FR 35522, June 21, 2006]
Notes of Decisions
Just Bagels Mfg., Inc. v. Mayorkas, 900 F. Supp. 2d 363 (S.D.N.Y. 2012).
“§ 1182 (a)(5)(A)®; 20 C.F.R. § 656.1 (a). After DOL certifies that these conditions are met, the employer must file an employment-based immigrant visa petition (“1-140 petition” or “petition”) with CIS.”
Raol, 16 I. & N. Dec. 466 (BIA 1978).
“2(c)(4); 20 C.F.R. 656.1 et seq. However, the Immigration and Naturalization Service is the entity that approves a third or sixth-preference visa petition and issues an immigrant visa to an alien already in this country.”
Stellar It v. Scalia (D.D.C. 2020).
“§ 1182 (a)(5)(A)(i); see also 20 C.F.R. § 656.1 (a)(1)- (2). To receive certification, the employer must also attest, among other things, that the employer is offering a wage that equals or exceeds the prevailing wage, and that the employer will pay the foreign worker a wage…”
See, Inc. v. Scalia (D.D.C. 2022).
“” 20 C.F.R. § 656.1 (b). Plaintiffs never explain how the implementing regulations conflict with the statute, and, for the reasons explained above, the Court is unpersuaded that they do.”
Durable Mfg. Co. v. LABR (7th Cir. 2009).
“20 C.F.R. §§ 656.1 -.41. Previously, with one exception not relevant here, § 656.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.