Lang Wallace LLC Blog

Read the article below taken from the ABA Law Journal which brings up the software-technology angle on a point that we harp upon repeatedly: just because you work really hard does not mean you are doing a good job.  Billing a client for “hard work” spent navigating a software system that has you baffled is a crying shame.  Everyone has to learn to do new things, yes, sure.  And we often learn new things, because it is necessary during the course of a case.  But as the author below points out, should lawyers bill clients for slowness on plain old software systems? No!  Especially those old ones the author notes below where lawyers are often still deficient like MS Office applications (Word, Outlook, Excel, PowerPoint and a new favorite, OneNote).  Software applications that we should know well … at least since Y2K (yes, it’s been 15 years).

What’s the solution? Consider making the learning curve part of the firm’s expense by giving the client a discount.  Frankly, you should not even admit how much time you spend fixing errors in Word anyway. Either lower your hours, or lower the hourly rate if you admittedly are using a new system.

Our firm has chosen individuals, both lawyers and staff, who know how to make a case or issue move quickly inception to preparation and filing because of our knowledge and methods using software. We realized we don’t need high overhead nor the frustration of navigating software poorly and clicking our lives and client-dollars away.  Furthermore, why so many softwares? A few (2-3) good applications can easily cover office systems and client management. 

What can a client do to guard against this?  Not much.  But there are clues along the way. Ask questions.  If you are big, audit your law firm like the author below suggests.  And ask the lawyers to train their staff.

Article: “Tech test could give law firms an incentive to make efficiency gains” Posted Aug 18, 2014 by Monica L. Sandler and pulled from ABA Journal Aug 22, 2014.

First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they attack you. Then you win. As a legal technology trainer, I'm eagerly anticipating the winning that should accompany the launch of the Suffolk Flaherty Legal Technology Audit. For more than a year, I’ve been working on the automated version of the LTA alongside the eponymous Casey Flaherty and Suffolk Law’s Andrew Perlman. The LTA is finally ready for prime time.

Casey developed the LTA when he moved in-house. He was motivated by what he witnessed as outside counsel: institutionalized waste driven by poor utilization of standard, labor-saving features built into everyday software (e.g., Outlook, Word, Excel). Casey created an assessment based on labor-intensive assignments commonly given to junior attorneys and paralegals. He administered the original LTA to associates and staff at his outside counsel.

Not surprisingly, the associates and paralegals fared abysmally on Casey’s assessment. What should have taken one hour took five, at an average rate of $270 per hour. Casey publicized the results in these very pages and, along the way, gained a partner in Suffolk’s Andy Perlman, a board of advisers (including me), and an opportunity to disseminate the LTA to a much wider audience. We’ve been working towards making the LTA commercially available and are thrilled to announce that the time is now.

Sign-ups begin Aug. 18 to coincide with the International Legal Technology Association’s annual conference. Administration of the LTA commences Sept. 2. But life should become truly interesting on Halloween. The Association of Corporate Counsel’s annual conference ends Oct. 31. On that day, the LTA will begin to fulfill free score requests submitted by in-house counsel. That is, in-house counsel will be able to see how their outside counsel performed (if outside counsel agree to release their scores). This transparency is the true genius of the LTA.

The theory is that clients have not held law firms accountable because accountability is near impossible without transparency. Sans accountability, there have been far too few incentives for law firms to sustain efforts to invest in the efficacy and efficiency gains that come with basic tech competence. I am excited to see what happens when the LTA is fully available. Will clients, who have complained about inefficiency for years, actually hold firms to account now that they have a tool to do so? Will law firms—famously slow to change—respond to pressure from their clients? Will LTA scores become the new metric that underscores law firm marketing (better, faster, cheaper)? Will bar associations put more an emphasis on tech training in granting CLE credits? And what about law schools? How long will it take them to respond to the "new" old reality that much of legal practice requires working on a computer? (There is also a law school edition of the LTA.)

Undoubtedly, I have a vested interest in the success of the LTA. My company and I stand to benefit from increased demand for technical training in law firms, especially because I have been so involved in bringing the LTA to market. But, for me, it goes way beyond short-term gains. My fellow trainers and I have been beating this drum for decades. We found lawyers and their staff wanting in basic tech competence, despite the fact that most spend the vast majority of their days sitting at a computer and billing for their time. But not many attorneys listened to our message until Casey came along.

If our industry finally ups its tech game, we will be celebrating a victory for everyone involved. Trainers will get our audience. Lawyers and staff will get the training they desperately need while securing blissful release from the low-value-added drudgery that occupies too much of their valuable time. Most importantly, clients will get the service they have always deserved.

The Visa Bulletin for September 2014 moved forward.  Big news for many.  Some of our clients want to know if they will indeed receive their green card next month, if their I-485 has been pending.  The things to know or consider are the following:

1. Your spot in line will open (check the Visa Bulletin here http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/english/law-and-policy/bulletin/2014/visa-bulletin-for-september-2014.html ).

    

2. The number of applications filed and pending is large.  Will US CIS be able to process and spit out Approval Notice for everyone who deserves it?  We assume they will.  Nonetheless, here is the chart of employment-based I-485 applications pending at CIS  -- sorted by month/year: http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/EB-I-485-Pending-Inventory-July2014.pdf

    

3. Item #2 brings up another good point: Did your Medical RFE Response and/or employment RFE that was mailed back (in response the mass-RFE’s issued in June 2014) meet up with the filing on time. In other words, will is your file re-reviewed, finalized and tagged to simply need the issuance of an Approval Notice? … or does it require yet another look by an officer? 

    

4. And not least, US CIS will be ready to issue an approval of your Adjustment of Status, so make sure your address is current with CIS! See the CIS cite link about retrogressed visas pending adjudication: http://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-processes-and-procedures/visa-availability-priority-dates/visa-retrogression.

We hope that things have gone smoothly on your case and it is queued for approval now.  No way to be sure until the moment of potential approval comes and goes starting Sept 1st (when approval notices start getting issued) and near the end of October (when all mail has surely arrived and the lack of approval would also be telling).

Unauthorized practice of law is an issue in every practice area of law. The practice, however, is especially common in the area of immigration law. Unauthorized individuals who represent themselves as immigration attorneys and notarios often take advantage of immigrants who are not knowledgeable about the legal issues in question, nor about standards governing the practice of law in the United States. A great deal of harm can result from going to a notario, who is not a licensed attorney and who may not have the correct knowledge of immigration law.

On Wednesday, June 4, 2014, AILA’s DC UPIL Committee held a presentation on this issue and taught the attendees, many of whom were Brazilian and Jamaican nationals, the importance of hiring an attorney as well as the dangers of using a notario.

Foreign nationals who need assistance with their immigration matters should always seek assistance from a licensed attorney knowledgeable on immigration law, rather than a notario, to prevent harm to their legal status and cases.  And, please report unlawful notario fraud to an organization under the American Immigration Lawyers’ Association (AILA) at http://www.stopnotariofraud.org/.

Last week, Department of State (“DOS”) informed American Immigration Lawyers Association (“AILA”) that “due to increasingly heavy demand by Canada-based visa applicants, the seven U.S. visa processing posts in Canada are extremely limited in their ability to accept TCN cases during the peak demand period of June, July, and August. Canadian posts encourage such applicants to seek appointments elsewhere in the world, such as in the applicant’s home country.  Canadian posts will offer increased appointment availability for TCNs during non-peak processing times, such as October and November, and January through May.”[1]

Mexico, with ten posts (Ciudad Juarez, Guadalajara, Hermosillo, Matamoros, Merida, Mexico City, Monterrey, Nogales, Nuevo Laredo, or Tijuana), is a possible alternative.

• TCNs who do not reside in Mexico and who seek to renew their visas in any category other than B1/B2 (pleasure/business) and H2 (temporary worker) can apply in Mexico. 

“NOTE – The applicant must apply to renew in the same visa category and cannot apply in a different category.”[2]

• TCNs should keep in mind that they may need to acquire a visa to visit Mexico.

   

Istanbul, London and Paris are some of the alternative locations for TCN processing this summer, so long as the applicant has proper documentation to lawfully enter the countries where the processing posts are located.  Acceptance of processing by a consulate is always optional. 

We also remind clients that failure to be issued a visa in the third-country will result in a trip directly onward to the home country if the visa stamp is otherwise expired/invalid for US reentry.

Effective June 1, 2014, USCIS is issuing Requests for Evidence (RFE’s) on Adjustment of Status Applications submitted for the green card asking applicants to submit a new Form I-693, Report of Medical Examination and Vaccination Record if the I-693 has been pending at US CIS for more than one year.  We note that the Medical Examination does not have to be less than one year old.  But, long-pending green cards will need to refresh their Medicals.

In the Policy Alert (PA-2014-005) issued on May 30, 2014, USCIS also restates that applicants must submit Form I-693 to USCIS within one year of the immigration medical examination, and, interestingly, that USCIS will provide additional ways to submit Form I-693.[1]

Question: I came to the US in August 2007 and completed my Masters in Electrical Engineering in December 2009. Then I got enrolled in an MBA program in January 2010. In the meantime my F-1 visa got expired and I went to India to get a new F-1 visa. I was not eligible for re-stamping because my visa had already expired more than 1 year ago. New Delhi US embassy rejected it twice, saying that I could be a potential immigrant. Now I want to go for third attempt. My question is if my visa is denied this time, can I apply for a B-1/2 visitor visa immediately? In case I don't get an F-1 visa, I want to come back to US to take care of my belongings.

Question: My green card (Employment based) was approved in September 2010, and since then I have not travelled outside US. But after 4 months from now, I have a need to be in India for 8-10 months to oversee medical treatment of my aged parents. I am planning to apply for re-entry permit and once my permit comes through, I will travel to India. Now my questions are:

1) If I return to US after 10 months of departure with a valid re-entry permit, will the counter for 5 years towards naturalization be re-set? Means, will I lose 1.5 years of stay in US and my 5 years will count from the day I return to US after 10 months?

2) If I don’t lose this 1.5 years, will that be an issue at the time of citizenship?

3) What documents are required at the time of interview for citizenship?

Question: I was granted asylum status 3 years ago. Based on that, I filed I-485 [application for adjustment of status] with an I-131 form for advance parole. On 08/23/11 my current Advance Parole will expire. I already filed for a new Advance Parole and did the biometrics [fingerprints] two month ago – but my new AP is still pending. I am supposed to leave the country in a week.

Is it possible for my husband to mail the AP letter after he receives it? Or do I have to pick it up in person? Is it going to affect our I-485 applications if I leave before getting the AP letter? Please, help!

Answer: I would wait for the AP. The general rule is if you travel before the advance parole document is issued, the I-485 application will be deemed abandoned. See Form I-131 Instructions, Page 4, Section 3 [Advance Parole Document], Part E, which states: If you travel before the advance parole document is issued, your application will be considered abandoned, if: (1) you depart the United States; or (2) the person. Seeking advance parole attempts to enter the United States before a decision is made on the application.

See link: http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-131instr.pdf

There are some exceptions for certain individuals in H, L, K or V status AND restrictions for asylees [I believe focused on traveling to the country of claimed persecution].

Please let me know if I may be of further assistance.

The visa-interview waiver program for renewing nonimmigrant visas is now permanent, after the conclusion of a two-year pilot program, according to the State Department.

As a result of recent revisions to the department’s Foreign Affairs Manual, consular officers now have discretion to waive in-person applicants’ interviews for certain H-1B, TN, L and other nonimmigrant visas.

Specifically, they may waive interviews for applicants seeking to renew any nonimmigrant visa within 12 months of the initial visa’s expiration date if it’s in the same classification with the same employer. For example, an L-visa holder who is seeking to renew her visa in the same category within a year of her last visa’s expiration date qualifies for the waiver. But an H-1B-visa
holder applying for an L-1 visa would need to appear for an interview.

With the exception of E, H, L, P and R visas, interview waivers are also available for nonimmigrant visa renewals up to 48 months after the initial visa expires if it’s in the same classification with the same employer.

First started in January 2012, the visa-interview waiver program allowed certain applicants in designated countries to renew U.S. visas without interviews. This is part of an effort to improve the visa process for individuals who have been screened previously, interviewed and approved for
certain nonimmigrant visas.

“This should improve the ability of nonimmigrant visa holders to renew visas in a timely fashion, rather than planning on time-consuming trips outside the U.S. to obtain visa renewals,” said Dillon Colucci, an immigration attorney in the Irvine, Calif., office of Greenberg Traurig. “Waiving the visa-interview requirements for these visa classes should free up valuable consular time and
decrease the time requirement to complete the overall visa process.”

Credit for this article belongs to Roy Maurer, online editor/manager for SHRM.

Question: I have been working with Company B since June 2009. Current I-797 for Company B expires in June 2012. Current H-1B visa stamp in passport is for Company A, and expires on September 7, 2011. I wish to take a quick trip to India this Friday and return on September 5, 2011. I do not have time to renew the H-1B visa stamp during this trip. If I arrive as per schedule, is there still risk that the immigration officer might not let me enter the US or only stamp my I-94 with validity till Sep 7th 2011? Also, current I-94 is valid till Dec 18th 2011. It was not stamped with I-797's expiry date of June 2012 because my passport was expiring on Dec 18th 2011; however, my renewed passport is now valid for another 10 years.

Answer: The Officer should grant you entry in H-1B status valid to the expiry date noted on your Company B I-94, June 2012. The expiry date on the visa stamp [9/7/2011] refers to the last day you may use that visa stamp to enter the US. However, it’s not uncommon for CBP to issue an I-94 valid only to the visa validity date, so don’t walk away from the counter until you have inspected your I-94 to make sure that a mistake was not made. I would also bring evidence of your current employment with B, including paystubs and/or an employment verification letter.

Question: I am a salaried employee working for Employer A on an H-1B. I currently have offers from 2 different Clients and I wanted to ask if it's legally allowed for me to work for both of these Clients being on H-1B? My employer is fine with it; however he wants me to send him an email stating that I'd like to work for the second Client to gain better experience and better salary compensation. Before I send them an email I wanted to make sure that by doing this, I'm not by any means jeopardizing my status. I'd appreciate if you can answer my above question. Thanks!

Answer: Yes, an H-1B can work (part-time or full-time) for more than one employer, but each must file a petition. See Letter, Bednarz, Chief, NIV Adjudications, CO 214h-C (June 29, 1994), reprinted in 71 No. 27 Interpreter Releases 936, 952 (July 18, 1994); Letter, Gorsky, Acting Chief Advisory Opinions Division, DOS (Apr. 13, 1998), reprinted in 75 No. 17 Interpreter Releases 631, 648 (May 4, 1998).