Practical Immigration Information and Updates

Maguette Eluyode 9/29/26 Maguette Eluyode 9/29/26

Immigration Is Personal. Your Data Should Be Treated That Way.

Colorful files neatly aligned on vertical bookshelf. Files are blue, green, light green, yellow and grey.

Most people think of an immigration filing as a set of forms. It's also a large collection of personal information, often more than you'd hand over in almost any other part of life.

What an immigration case can contain

The information in a file depends on the type of case, but some items show up almost everywhere:

In most cases

Passport and travel history, including entry and exit records
Birth, marriage, and divorce records
Home addresses over many years
Photographs and fingerprints, collected at biometrics appointments

In employment-based cases

Employment history, pay records, and tax documents
Education records and credential evaluations
Company information, including business and financial records supplied by the employer

In family-based cases

Family members' names, dates of birth, and immigration details
In some cases, DNA test results used to establish a biological relationship

In business and investment cases

Business formation documents, ownership records, and operating records
Financial records, including bank statements, source-of-funds documentation, and tax filings

In certain applications

Medical examination results

Together, these documents give a detailed picture of a person's life. That is a good reason to think about how the information is handled before it ever reaches a government agency.

Some of this information can't be replaced if it's exposed. You can renew a passport or close a bank account, but you can't change your DNA, and genetic information also says something about your biological relatives. Financial and business records can reveal more than an applicant expects, including details about partners, investors, and family members who were never part of the case. The more sensitive the record, the more it matters how it is sent, stored, and eventually deleted.

Where your information travels

A single case can involve several parties, and each one is a place where data can be stored, copied, or shared. You and your family gather and send documents, often by email or phone. In employment-based cases, your employer supplies company and job information. Your legal representative handles the file using software for storage, email, e-signature, scheduling, and case management. Third-party vendors such as translators, credential evaluators, and couriers may also touch parts of it. Finally, the government agencies involved hold and use the information under their own rules and published notices.

Once documents are with the government, the applicant generally has limited control over them. Earlier in the chain, there is far more room to make careful choices.

Everyday habits that add risk

Most exposure comes from ordinary habits rather than dramatic breaches. Passport scans and tax records get sent as regular email attachments. Copies of identity documents sit in a shared cloud folder that too many people can open. Photos of documents are texted back and forth. A file-sharing link is created with no expiration date. Old case files stay on devices long after the case has closed. None of this is unusual, and all of it is easy to overlook.

Questions worth asking any provider

Whether you're working with a law firm, a preparer, or an online service, it's reasonable to ask how your documents are sent and stored, and whether they are encrypted in transit and at rest. Ask who has access to your file, and whether that access is limited to the people who need it. Ask which outside tools or vendors handle your information and what they do with it, including whether any AI tools are used to process your documents and, if so, what data is shared with them. Ask how long your file is kept and what happens when the case ends, especially for sensitive records like DNA results or financial statements. And ask what the provider's process is if something goes wrong. A provider who takes privacy seriously should be able to answer all of this plainly.

Why this matters now

Immigration matters are getting more scrutiny, and the information in these files is sensitive by nature. Careful data handling is part of the work, not an extra.

How we approach it at IMMerge Law

We built our practice around the idea that a privacy-first approach should be the standard, not an upgrade. In practice, that means a few things. Client communications and document storage run on encrypted systems designed to limit access to only the people working on your case. We collect what a case actually requires, and we're deliberate about not asking for more than that. Any technology we use, including AI tools, is evaluated for how it handles client data before we adopt it, and we don't use client documents to train AI systems. Once a case concludes, records are retained only as long as necessary for the matter or as required by law, and sensitive documents are handled with that in mind from the start.

If you'd like more detail on how any of this works for your specific case, that's something we're happy to walk through during a consultation.

Maguette Eluyode 9/2/26 Maguette Eluyode 9/2/26

The H-1B Just Got Expensive: What Employers Are Exploring Instead

For years, the H-1B was the default starting point for U.S. employers hiring skilled foreign talent. That default is being seriously reconsidered.

For years, the H-1B was the default starting point for U.S. employers hiring skilled foreign talent. That default is being seriously reconsidered. Between a $100,000 payment tied to a 2025 presidential proclamation (currently blocked in federal court) and a newly proposed $103,265 DHS fee on cap-subject petitions, the cost calculus around the H-1B has shifted dramatically — even while the legal landscape is still unsettled. Here's where things stand, and what alternatives are getting a closer look.

Where the H-1B Fee Situation Actually Stands

It's worth being precise here, because there are two different things in play:

The $100,000 proclamation fee (effective September 2025) was struck down by a federal district court, and as of late July 2026 the First Circuit declined to let it take effect while the government's appeal proceeds. For now, it isn't being collected.
A separate proposed DHS rule would impose a $103,265 fee on all cap-subject H-1B petitions — including advanced-degree exemption cases — regardless of employer size or nonprofit status. This is not yet final. It was published for comment in late August 2026, with the comment period running through September 24, 2026.

Neither fee is guaranteed to survive in its current form. But the direction is clear enough that many employers aren't waiting to find out — they're actively building alternative plans now.

Why This Is Prompting a Second Look at Other Categories

Even before any fee attaches, the H-1B already comes with a lottery system, an annual cap, and no guarantee of selection. Layer a six-figure fee on top of that uncertainty, and for many roles, the math simply stops working — particularly for startups, smaller employers, and roles that don't strictly require an H-1B-specific pathway.

That's pushing more employers to ask a different question: does this hire actually need to go through the H-1B at all?

Alternatives Worth Exploring

O-1 — Extraordinary Ability No lottery, no annual cap, and no dependency on a corporate relationship — the O-1 is built around the individual's own track record of achievement in their field. It's increasingly used for founders, senior technical talent, and specialists with a documented reputation, and it isn't touched by the fee proposals currently aimed at the H-1B.

TN — USMCA Professionals For Canadian and Mexican citizens working in a recognized professional occupation, the TN remains a comparatively fast, uncapped option. It doesn't carry the H-1B's lottery risk or fee exposure, though it's limited to nationals of those two countries and to specific professional categories.

J-1 — Exchange Visitor Often overlooked as an employment solution, the J-1 can work well for research, training, and certain academic or specialized-skill placements through a designated exchange program. It comes with its own constraints — including, for some categories, a two-year home residency requirement — so it's not a fit for every role, but it's worth evaluating where it lines up.

E-2 — Treaty Investor For nationals of countries with a qualifying treaty with the U.S., the E-2 can support key employees of a qualifying enterprise, not just the investor themselves. It's a fundamentally different mechanism than the H-1B — tied to nationality and a qualifying business relationship rather than a lottery — which makes it immune to the fee changes affecting H-1B cap petitions, but it depends heavily on the underlying business and investment structure.

This is not an exhaustive list as there are other visa categories to consider. Work with an experienced attorney to devise the proper strategy.

The Bigger Shift

None of these categories are universal substitutes for the H-1B — each comes with its own eligibility rules, and the right fit depends heavily on the individual's background, nationality, and the nature of the role. But the broader trend is real: with H-1B costs and uncertainty both climbing, more employers are treating it as one option among several, rather than the automatic first move.

This post is provided for general informational purposes only and reflects publicly available information as of the date of publication. It is not legal advice, does not create an attorney-client relationship, and shouldn't be relied on as a substitute for individualized counsel. Immigration rules — and the legal status of the fees discussed above — are actively changing, and how they apply to any particular situation depends on facts not addressed here. Anyone with questions about a specific case should consult a licensed immigration attorney.

Maguette Eluyode 9/1/26 Maguette Eluyode 9/1/26

The New I-485 Form and the Public Charge Rule: What's Changing September 18

Anyone following the green card process through adjustment of status should know about September 18, 2026 — the date a new edition of Form I-485 and a significantly broader public charge review both take effect.

What's Actually Changing

Historically, "public charge" has meant one thing: could this person become primarily dependent on the government to get by? For the past several years, USCIS applied a fairly narrow test — largely limited to cash assistance and long-term institutional care.

Starting September 18, that narrow framework is going away. USCIS is returning to a broader, case-by-case "totality of the circumstances" review, giving officers more discretion to weigh the full picture of an applicant's situation rather than a short list of disqualifying benefits.

The New Form I-485

Along with the policy shift comes a new form edition, dated 09/18/26. This isn't a routine update:

No grace period. Applications postmarked or filed electronically before September 18 can still use the current (01/20/25) edition. Anything filed on or after September 18 must use the new edition, and USCIS has indicated the old version will be rejected outright rather than simply flagged.
Filing date determines which rules apply. It's the filing date — not the priority date or interview date — that decides which public charge framework governs a given case.

What "Totality of the Circumstances" Means in Practice

Rather than a checklist of disqualifying benefits, officers will weigh a broader mix of statutory factors together, including:

Age — and how it affects the ability to work
Health — including anything that could affect employability or require ongoing care
Family status — household size and circumstances
Assets, resources, and financial status — a fuller financial picture, not a single number
Education and skills
The Affidavit of Support (Form I-864) — and whether it adequately supports the case

By statute, no single factor other than a missing or insufficient Affidavit of Support (where one is required) is supposed to decide a case on its own. But with more factors in play and more discretion given to individual officers, how the full picture comes together carries more weight than it did under the outgoing framework.

Does Using Public Benefits Automatically Disqualify Someone?

No. Under the outgoing framework, a defined list of benefits was excluded from consideration entirely. Under the new approach, benefit use on or after September 18 can be weighed as one factor among several, rather than being off the table by default — but it's still just one part of a larger analysis, not an automatic disqualifier on its own.

The underlying legal question hasn't changed: not whether someone has ever received public assistance, but whether the totality of their circumstances suggests they're likely to become dependent on it going forward.

Why This Date Matters

Because the filing date determines which framework applies, September 18 functions as a dividing line for anyone with a pending or upcoming adjustment of status filing. The practical impact of that shift will look different from case to case, depending on individual circumstances.

This post is provided for general informational purposes only and reflects publicly available USCIS guidance as of the date of publication. It is not legal advice, does not create an attorney-client relationship, and shouldn't be relied on as a substitute for individualized counsel. Immigration rules and their application can change, and how they apply to any particular situation depends on facts not addressed here. Anyone with questions about a specific case should consult a licensed immigration attorney.

Maguette Eluyode 8/31/26 Maguette Eluyode 8/31/26

L-1 vs. O-1: Which Visa Fits Your Executive or Specialist?

If you're relocating a manager, executive, or standout specialist to the U.S., two visa categories usually rise to the top of the list: the L-1 and the O-1. Both let employers move high-value talent into the U.S. without going through the H-1B lottery — but they're built for different situations, and picking the wrong one can cost you months of delay. Here's how to tell them apart.

If you're relocating a manager, executive, or standout specialist to the U.S., two visa categories usually come up early in the conversation: the L-1 and the O-1. Both let employers bring in high-value talent without going through the yearly H-1B lottery — but they're designed for different situations, and choosing the wrong one can mean months of unnecessary delay.

The L-1: Built Around Your Company

The L-1 is essentially an internal transfer visa. It's designed for someone who already works for your company abroad and needs to move to a related U.S. office — not for an open-market hire.

The focus here is on the relationship between the foreign and U.S. entities, and on the employee's existing history within the organization. There's a minimum period of prior employment abroad, and the role has to fit into one of a few recognized categories — think leadership positions or roles requiring knowledge specific to the company.

One advantage worth knowing: the L-1 is generally considered friendlier toward employees who also have green card plans in the works, which makes it a popular bridge visa for companies thinking long-term about a hire.

The O-1: Built Around the Individual

The O-1 works differently. It doesn't require any prior relationship between the employee and the sponsoring company — instead, it's built around the individual's own track record of recognition and achievement in their field.

This route tends to suit people with an independent reputation — awards, recognition in their industry, a track record that stands on its own regardless of who they've worked for. It's often a good fit for founders, specialized executives, and people whose accomplishments are well documented outside of any single employer relationship.

Because it isn't tied to a corporate relationship, the O-1 can also offer more flexibility in how it's structured, including options that aren't available under the L-1.

Which One Fits?

The right choice usually comes down to two questions:

Has this person already been working for your company abroad? If so, the L-1 is often the more natural fit.
Does this person have a strong, independent reputation in their field — one that exists apart from any single employer? If so, the O-1 may be worth exploring, especially if there's no qualifying corporate relationship to lean on.

Some candidates could realistically qualify for either visa, and in those cases the better strategy depends on the specifics of the role, the company structure, and long-term immigration goals.

Every situation is different, and the details that make a case succeed (or stall) are easy to miss without experience navigating them. If you're weighing an L-1 versus an O-1 for an upcoming move to the U.S., IMMerge Law can help you figure out the right path.