In a shift that has caught many foreign workers off guard, USCIS Service Centers have begun issuing Notices to Appear (NTAs) to H-1B workers shortly after the withdrawal of their approved petitions, even when the withdrawal occurs as required following the end of employment. These NTAs often allege that the foreign national is unlawfully present in the United States as of the date of petition withdrawal, despite the fact that the worker remains in a period of authorized stay under the 60-day grace period permitted by regulation, and in many cases, has already timely filed a change of status or extension of stay request.

This new pattern appears to conflict with USCIS’s own policy guidance—specifically Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187 (Feb. 28, 2025) and the longstanding unlawful presence guidance from May 6, 2009—which clarify that NTAs are to be issued only after an unfavorable decision when an individual is no longer lawfully present. Instead, USCIS is initiating removal proceedings against individuals who are in compliance with both regulatory grace periods and filing timelines, raising serious concerns about fairness, consistency, and due process.

In response to this troubling and legally unsupported trend, we believe the most effective way to correct course is through coordinated public action and congressional oversight. USCIS must be reminded—forcefully and repeatedly—that its own policy memoranda and federal regulations do not authorize the issuance of NTAs to individuals who remain in the United States under a period of authorized stay, including:

• H-1B workers who are within the 60-day grace period following termination of employment;
• Individuals who have timely filed a change of status (COS) or extension of status (EOS) request;
• Applicants with a pending Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status, who are permitted by statute and policy to remain in the U.S. during adjudication.

To bring this issue to the attention of the appropriate oversight authorities—and to compel USCIS to cease issuing these NTAs—we have developed a step-by-step guide for affected individuals, attorneys, employers, and advocates. This guide outlines the concrete actions you can take to demand accountability and policy compliance, including how to contact:

• Congressional oversight committees;
• USCIS Public Engagement Division;
• USCIS Policy Division;
• USCIS Service Center Operations Directorate; and
• USCIS Office of the Director

STEP #1: Letter to Senate Judiciary Committee – Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship and Border Safety

The Honorable Alex Padilla
Chair, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and Border Safety
Senate Committee on the Judiciary
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

The Honorable John Cornyn
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and Border Safety
Senate Committee on the Judiciary
152 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Subject: Request for Oversight of USCIS’s Improper Issuance of NTAs to Lawfully Present Nonimmigrants

Dear Chairman Padilla and Ranking Member Cornyn:

I am writing to respectfully request congressional oversight regarding the recent practice of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Service Centers — particularly the California and Nebraska Service Centers — issuing Notices to Appear (NTAs) to individuals who remain lawfully present in the United States under existing immigration regulations and USCIS policy.

Specifically, USCIS has begun issuing NTAs to nonimmigrants who are within the 60-day grace period after the cessation of H-1B employment and who have timely filed applications for change of status (e.g., to H-4) or extensions of stay. These individuals are not unlawfully present and are authorized to remain in the United States under 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2). Additionally, some NTAs have been issued to individuals with pending applications for adjustment of status (Form I-485), who are likewise in a period of authorized stay under USCIS’s longstanding policy.

In one example, a nonimmigrant was issued an NTA just days after her employer withdrew her H-1B petition — despite the fact that her Form I-94 had not expired, and she had timely filed a change of status application within the grace period. USCIS charged her with removability under INA § 237(a)(1)(B) and (C), alleging unlawful presence beginning immediately after the H-1B withdrawal, contrary to USCIS’s own May 6, 2009 memorandum (AFM Update AD 08-03), which confirms that nonimmigrants in such circumstances are not unlawfully present.

This misuse of the NTA process:

• Contradicts USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187, which provides that NTAs are to be issued only upon an unfavorable decision when an individual is not lawfully present;
• Wastes resources by initiating removal proceedings for individuals who have not violated the terms of their stay;
• Causes severe harm to individuals who have complied with the law and reasonably relied on published USCIS guidance.

I respectfully urge the Subcommittee to investigate this matter and request that USCIS:

• Clarify that nonimmigrants in a 60-day grace period with a timely pending application are lawfully present;
• Prohibit the issuance of NTAs in such cases until after a final denial is issued; and
• Reinforce protections for applicants with pending adjustment of status applications.

Thank you for your time and for your ongoing efforts to ensure fairness, consistency, and transparency in our immigration system.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[City, State]

STEP #2: Letter to House Judiciary Committee – Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement

The Honorable Tom McClintock
Chair, Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement
House Committee on the Judiciary
2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

The Honorable Pramila Jayapal
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement
House Committee on the Judiciary
2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Subject: Request for Oversight of USCIS’s Improper Issuance of NTAs to Lawfully Present Nonimmigrants

Dear Chairman McClintock and Ranking Member Jayapal:

I am writing to respectfully request congressional oversight regarding the recent practice of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Service Centers — particularly the California and Nebraska Service Centers — issuing Notices to Appear (NTAs) to individuals who remain lawfully present in the United States under existing immigration regulations and USCIS policy.

Specifically, USCIS has begun issuing NTAs to nonimmigrants who are within the 60-day grace period after the cessation of H-1B employment and who have timely filed applications for change of status (e.g., to H-4) or extensions of stay. These individuals are not unlawfully present and are authorized to remain in the United States under 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2). Additionally, some NTAs have been issued to individuals with pending applications for adjustment of status (Form I-485), who are likewise in a period of authorized stay under USCIS’s longstanding policy.

In one example, a nonimmigrant was issued an NTA just days after her employer withdrew her H-1B petition — despite the fact that her Form I-94 had not expired, and she had timely filed a change of status application within the grace period. USCIS charged her with removability under INA § 237(a)(1)(B) and (C), alleging unlawful presence beginning immediately after the H-1B withdrawal, contrary to USCIS’s own May 6, 2009 memorandum (AFM Update AD 08-03), which confirms that nonimmigrants in such circumstances are not unlawfully present.

This misuse of the NTA process:

• Contradicts USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187, which provides that NTAs are to be issued only upon an unfavorable decision when an individual is not lawfully present;
• Wastes resources by initiating removal proceedings for individuals who have not violated the terms of their stay;
• Causes severe harm to individuals who have complied with the law and reasonably relied on published USCIS guidance.

I respectfully urge the Subcommittee to investigate this matter and request that USCIS:

• Clarify that nonimmigrants in a 60-day grace period with a timely pending application are lawfully present;
• Prohibit the issuance of NTAs in such cases until after a final denial is issued; and
• Reinforce protections for applicants with pending adjustment of status applications.

Thank you for your time and for your ongoing efforts to ensure fairness, consistency, and transparency in our immigration system.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]
[City, State]

STEP #3: Email USCIS Public Engagement Division

Send email to: public.engagement@uscis.dhs.gov

Subject Line: “Feedback on Improper Issuance of NTAs Based on USCIS PM-602-0187 dated February 28, 2025”

Dear Public Engagement Division,

I am writing to bring to your attention a pattern of Notices to Appear (NTAs) being issued by the USCIS Service Centers in apparent contradiction to USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187 dated February 28, 2025. Specifically, NTAs are being issued to individuals who remain in a period of authorized stay under the 60-day grace period in 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2), and/or who have timely filed change of status or adjustment of status applications that are still pending. These individuals are not unlawfully present under current USCIS policy, yet are being charged with removability and placed in proceedings without a prior unfavorable adjudication, contrary to the policy memorandum and the May 6, 2009 unlawful presence guidance. In particular, NTAs are being issued to individuals:

• Who are within the 60-day grace period following cessation of employment and have timely filed change of status or extension of stay applications; or
• Who have pending applications for adjustment of status under INA § 245 and are therefore in a period of authorized stay.

These actions are inconsistent with USCIS’s longstanding policy on unlawful presence and the conditions required to issue an NTA under PM-602-0187.

Recommended Change:

We respectfully request that USCIS clarify that NTAs should not be issued to nonimmigrants who are within the 60-day grace period and have timely filed change of status or extension of stay applications, or to individuals with pending I-485 applications who remain in a period of authorized stay.

Supporting Authority and Data:

1. PM-602-0187, Section VI provides that an NTA should only be issued “upon issuance of an unfavorable decision on a benefit request” and where the individual is not lawfully present. However, in multiple cases we have observed, USCIS issued NTAs before adjudicating pending applications, and while the individuals remained in lawful periods of stay.
2. 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2) expressly provides a 60-day grace period of authorized stay following cessation of employment for certain nonimmigrants, including H-1B workers. USCIS’s own guidance confirms that the filing of a timely, non-frivolous change of status application during this period tolls the accrual of unlawful presence.
3. May 6, 2009 USCIS Memorandum on Unlawful Presence (AFM Update AD 08-03) clarifies that:
   • When a nonimmigrant files a timely, non-frivolous application for change or extension of status, they are in a period of stay authorized by the Secretary, and no unlawful presence accrues.
   • Individuals with properly filed, pending applications for adjustment of status (Form I-485) are also in a period of authorized stay and do not accrue unlawful presence, even if their underlying nonimmigrant status has expired.

Case Examples:

Example 1 – COS Filed During 60-Day Grace Period:
On June 9, 2025, an NTA was issued to an H-1B beneficiary whose petition was withdrawn on April 8, 2025. The individual timely filed an H-4 change of status application during the grace period, and the Form I-94 remained valid at the time of filing. Nevertheless, the NTA charged her as removable under INA § 237(a)(1)(B) and (C), claiming she was unlawfully present as of April 8. This conclusion ignored both the grace period and the pending application, and failed to acknowledge that no unfavorable decision had been issued.

Example 2 – Pending I-485 Adjustment Application:
In another case, an individual whose petition was withdrawn remained in the United States based on a pending I-485 adjustment application filed pursuant to an approved employment-based immigrant petition. Despite the withdrawal, this individual is in a period of authorized stay, and per the 2009 unlawful presence memorandum, does not accrue unlawful presence. This is well-established USCIS policy: individuals with pending I-485 applications are not considered unlawfully present unless their application is denied and they remain beyond that denial. Yet we have seen NTAs issued to such individuals as if they are present without authorization, which contradicts both law and agency guidance.

Conclusion:

We urge USCIS to issue clarification to Service Centers and adjudicators confirming that:

• The 60-day grace period following employment termination constitutes lawful presence;
• Nonimmigrants who file a timely, non-frivolous COS or EOS request are in a period of stay authorized;
• Individuals with pending I-485 applications remain in a period of authorized stay and do not accrue unlawful presence; and
• NTAs should not be issued to such individuals absent a final, unfavorable adjudication.

These clarifications are essential to prevent the unjust initiation of removal proceedings against individuals who are fully in compliance with immigration regulations and who have acted in good faith to maintain lawful presence in the United States.

Thank you for your time and attention to this important issue. I would be happy to provide additional examples or documentation upon request.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]

STEP #4: Email USCIS Policy Division

Send email to: policyfeedback@uscis.dhs.gov

Subject Line: “USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187 dated February 28, 2025”

Dear USCIS Policy Division,

I write to provide formal feedback on Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187 dated February 28, 2025, titled “Issuance of Notices to Appear (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Deportable Aliens.”

While we appreciate USCIS’s efforts to ensure the integrity of the immigration system, we are concerned that Service Centers are issuing Notices to Appear (NTAs) in situations where doing so contradicts both the plain text of this memorandum and applicable USCIS policy on lawful presence. In particular, NTAs are being issued to individuals:

• Who are within the 60-day grace period following cessation of employment and have timely filed change of status or extension of stay applications; or
• Who have pending applications for adjustment of status under INA § 245 and are therefore in a period of authorized stay.

These actions are inconsistent with USCIS’s longstanding policy on unlawful presence and the conditions required to issue an NTA under PM-602-0187.

Recommended Change:

We respectfully request that USCIS clarify that NTAs should not be issued to nonimmigrants who are within the 60-day grace period and have timely filed change of status or extension of stay applications, or to individuals with pending I-485 applications who remain in a period of authorized stay.

Supporting Authority and Data:

4. PM-602-0187, Section VI provides that an NTA should only be issued “upon issuance of an unfavorable decision on a benefit request” and where the individual is not lawfully present. However, in multiple cases we have observed, USCIS issued NTAs before adjudicating pending applications, and while the individuals remained in lawful periods of stay.
5. 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2) expressly provides a 60-day grace period of authorized stay following cessation of employment for certain nonimmigrants, including H-1B workers. USCIS’s own guidance confirms that the filing of a timely, non-frivolous change of status application during this period tolls the accrual of unlawful presence.
6. May 6, 2009 USCIS Memorandum on Unlawful Presence (AFM Update AD 08-03) clarifies that:
   • When a nonimmigrant files a timely, non-frivolous application for change or extension of status, they are in a period of stay authorized by the Secretary, and no unlawful presence accrues.
   • Individuals with properly filed, pending applications for adjustment of status (Form I-485) are also in a period of authorized stay and do not accrue unlawful presence, even if their underlying nonimmigrant status has expired.

Case Examples:

Example 1 – COS Filed During 60-Day Grace Period:
On June 9, 2025, an NTA was issued to an H-1B beneficiary whose petition was withdrawn on April 8, 2025. The individual timely filed an H-4 change of status application during the grace period, and the Form I-94 remained valid at the time of filing. Nevertheless, the NTA charged her as removable under INA § 237(a)(1)(B) and (C), claiming she was unlawfully present as of April 8. This conclusion ignored both the grace period and the pending application, and failed to acknowledge that no unfavorable decision had been issued.

Example 2 – Pending I-485 Adjustment Application:
In another case, an individual whose petition was withdrawn remained in the United States based on a pending I-485 adjustment application filed pursuant to an approved employment-based immigrant petition. Despite the withdrawal, this individual is in a period of authorized stay, and per the 2009 unlawful presence memorandum, does not accrue unlawful presence. This is well-established USCIS policy: individuals with pending I-485 applications are not considered unlawfully present unless their application is denied and they remain beyond that denial. Yet we have seen NTAs issued to such individuals as if they are present without authorization, which contradicts both law and agency guidance.

Conclusion:

We urge USCIS to issue clarification to Service Centers and adjudicators confirming that:

• The 60-day grace period following employment termination constitutes lawful presence;
• Nonimmigrants who file a timely, non-frivolous COS or EOS request are in a period of stay authorized;
• Individuals with pending I-485 applications remain in a period of authorized stay and do not accrue unlawful presence; and
• NTAs should not be issued to such individuals absent a final, unfavorable adjudication.

These clarifications are essential to prevent the unjust initiation of removal proceedings against individuals who are fully in compliance with immigration regulations and who have acted in good faith to maintain lawful presence in the United States.

Thank you for your time and attention to this important issue. I would be happy to provide additional examples or documentation upon request.

Sincerely,
[Your Full Name]

STEP #5: Letter to USCIS Service Center Operations Directorate

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Attn: Service Center Operations Directorate (SCOPS)
20 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20529-2060

Re: Issuance of NTAs for Lawfully Present Individuals within 60-Day Grace Period

Dear Director,

We respectfully write to bring to your attention instances in which USCIS Service Centers are issuing Notices to Appear (NTAs) to individuals who remain lawfully present in the United States under the 60-day grace period provided by regulation and who have timely filed change of status or extension of stay requests. These NTAs are inconsistent with both current USCIS policy and longstanding guidance concerning lawful presence and the initiation of removal proceedings.

The USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187 dated February 28, 2025, states clearly that USCIS will issue an NTA “where, upon issuance of an unfavorable decision on a benefit request, the alien is not lawfully present in the United States”. Yet in the cases we are seeing, including the one highlighted below, no unfavorable decision has been issued, and the individual remains in a period of authorized stay based on:

1. A valid I-94 that has not yet expired,
2. A pending, timely filed change of status application submitted during the 60-day grace period under 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2), and
3. Clear guidance from USCIS that such filings stop the accrual of unlawful presence while pending.

This is further supported by the May 6, 2009 USCIS memorandum, “Consolidation of Guidance Concerning Unlawful Presence”, which affirms that when a nonimmigrant is admitted, “the period of stay authorized is generally noted on Form I-94,” and that no unlawful presence accrues while a properly filed change of status or extension of stay is pending.

Unfortunately, we are now seeing NTAs issued to individuals under these exact conditions. One recent NTA, issued on June 9, 2025, provides a clear example. According to page 4 of the NTA, the beneficiary’s approved H-1B petition was withdrawn on April 8, 2025. The NTA incorrectly charges that the beneficiary remained in the United States beyond April 8, 2025, without authorization. In fact, the period of stay authorized, as noted on her Form I-94, had not yet expired. She was still maintaining lawful H-1B status pursuant to the 60-day grace period provided under 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2), and she timely filed a change of status application to H-4 within that grace period. Although that application remains pending, the NTA charges her as removable under INA § 237(a)(1)(B) and (C), alleging that she began accruing unlawful presence as of April 8, 2025.

The NTA further alleges that the beneficiary does not currently possess a valid nonimmigrant visa or other entry document permitting her to remain in the United States. This, too, is incorrect. The withdrawal of the H-1B petition had no effect on her underlying nonimmigrant visa, which serves as an entry document, nor did it invalidate her unexpired Form I-94, which governed her period of stay. She was still in a period of stay authorized by the Secretary of Homeland Security both under the grace period and by virtue of the pending, non-frivolous change of status application.

The conclusions in the NTA are erroneous for several reasons:

1. Failure to acknowledge the 60-day grace period: The NTA disregards the regulatory provision that grants H-1B holders a 60-day period of lawful stay following the cessation of employment.
2. Improper disregard of a pending application: The individual timely filed a change of status to H-4, which under both USCIS policy and the 2009 unlawful presence guidance, tolls the accrual of unlawful presence during the pendency of the application.
3. Incorrect conclusion regarding visa and I-94 validity: The withdrawal of the H-1B petition does not automatically cancel the nonimmigrant visa in the passport or invalidate an unexpired Form I-94.
4. Issuance of NTA without a triggering denial: The policy memorandum PM-602-0187 specifies that USCIS will issue an NTA “upon issuance of an unfavorable decision” when the individual is not lawfully present. Here, no such unfavorable decision has occurred.

These types of NTAs not only contradict USCIS’s own policies but also place compliant nonimmigrants into removal proceedings unjustly, causing unnecessary harm and confusion. We urge USCIS to take immediate corrective action.

We respectfully urge USCIS to:

1. Re-examine the practices at Service Centers that result in the premature issuance of NTAs before adjudication of pending change of status or extension of stay requests.
2. Instruct officers that individuals within the 60-day grace period who have a pending, timely, non-frivolous COS or EOS application are lawfully present and should not be issued NTAs absent a denial of that application.
3. Issue clarification to the public and adjudicators reaffirming that presence during the 60-day grace period with a pending change of status request is authorized and not a basis for removal proceedings.

We appreciate your attention to this important issue and your continued commitment to maintaining integrity and fairness in the administration of immigration benefits.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

STEP #5: Letter to USCIS Office of the Director

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Office of the Director (MS 2000)
Camp Springs, MD 20588-0009

Re: Issuance of NTAs for Lawfully Present Individuals within 60-Day Grace Period

Dear Director,

We respectfully write to bring to your attention instances in which USCIS Service Centers are issuing Notices to Appear (NTAs) to individuals who remain lawfully present in the United States under the 60-day grace period provided by regulation and who have timely filed change of status or extension of stay requests. These NTAs are inconsistent with both current USCIS policy and longstanding guidance concerning lawful presence and the initiation of removal proceedings.

The USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0187 dated February 28, 2025, states clearly that USCIS will issue an NTA “where, upon issuance of an unfavorable decision on a benefit request, the alien is not lawfully present in the United States”. Yet in the cases we are seeing, including the one highlighted below, no unfavorable decision has been issued, and the individual remains in a period of authorized stay based on:

4. A valid I-94 that has not yet expired,
5. A pending, timely filed change of status application submitted during the 60-day grace period under 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2), and
6. Clear guidance from USCIS that such filings stop the accrual of unlawful presence while pending.

This is further supported by the May 6, 2009 USCIS memorandum, “Consolidation of Guidance Concerning Unlawful Presence”, which affirms that when a nonimmigrant is admitted, “the period of stay authorized is generally noted on Form I-94,” and that no unlawful presence accrues while a properly filed change of status or extension of stay is pending.

Unfortunately, we are now seeing NTAs issued to individuals under these exact conditions. One recent NTA, issued on June 9, 2025, provides a clear example. According to page 4 of the NTA, the beneficiary’s approved H-1B petition was withdrawn on April 8, 2025. The NTA incorrectly charges that the beneficiary remained in the United States beyond April 8, 2025, without authorization. In fact, the period of stay authorized, as noted on her Form I-94, had not yet expired. She was still maintaining lawful H-1B status pursuant to the 60-day grace period provided under 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2), and she timely filed a change of status application to H-4 within that grace period. Although that application remains pending, the NTA charges her as removable under INA § 237(a)(1)(B) and (C), alleging that she began accruing unlawful presence as of April 8, 2025.

The NTA further alleges that the beneficiary does not currently possess a valid nonimmigrant visa or other entry document permitting her to remain in the United States. This, too, is incorrect. The withdrawal of the H-1B petition had no effect on her underlying nonimmigrant visa, which serves as an entry document, nor did it invalidate her unexpired Form I-94, which governed her period of stay. She was still in a period of stay authorized by the Secretary of Homeland Security both under the grace period and by virtue of the pending, non-frivolous change of status application.

The conclusions in the NTA are erroneous for several reasons:

5. Failure to acknowledge the 60-day grace period: The NTA disregards the regulatory provision that grants H-1B holders a 60-day period of lawful stay following the cessation of employment.
6. Improper disregard of a pending application: The individual timely filed a change of status to H-4, which under both USCIS policy and the 2009 unlawful presence guidance, tolls the accrual of unlawful presence during the pendency of the application.
7. Incorrect conclusion regarding visa and I-94 validity: The withdrawal of the H-1B petition does not automatically cancel the nonimmigrant visa in the passport or invalidate an unexpired Form I-94.
8. Issuance of NTA without a triggering denial: The policy memorandum PM-602-0187 specifies that USCIS will issue an NTA “upon issuance of an unfavorable decision” when the individual is not lawfully present. Here, no such unfavorable decision has occurred.

These types of NTAs not only contradict USCIS’s own policies but also place compliant nonimmigrants into removal proceedings unjustly, causing unnecessary harm and confusion. We urge USCIS to take immediate corrective action.

We respectfully urge USCIS to:

4. Re-examine the practices at Service Centers that result in the premature issuance of NTAs before adjudication of pending change of status or extension of stay requests.
5. Instruct officers that individuals within the 60-day grace period who have a pending, timely, non-frivolous COS or EOS application are lawfully present and should not be issued NTAs absent a denial of that application.
6. Issue clarification to the public and adjudicators reaffirming that presence during the 60-day grace period with a pending change of status request is authorized and not a basis for removal proceedings.

We appreciate your attention to this important issue and your continued commitment to maintaining integrity and fairness in the administration of immigration benefits.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]

Together, we can push USCIS to correct course and ensure individuals who are lawfully present are not unjustly subjected to removal proc

By: Emily Neumann

Emily Neumann is Managing Partner at Reddy Neumann Brown PC with 20 years of experience practicing US immigration law providing services to U.S. businesses and multinational corporations. Emily has helped transform the firm from a solo practice to Houston’s largest immigration law firm focused exclusively on U.S. employment-based immigration.  She received her Bachelor’s degree in Biology from Central Michigan University and her Juris Doctorate degree from the University of Houston Law Center. Emily has been quoted in Bloomberg Law, U.S. News & World Report, Inside Higher Ed, and The Times of India on various hot topics in immigration. She is a member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and Society for Human Resource Management.