Weekly Brief
U.S. Immigration Law
Week of September 7 – September 13, 2026 · Full-spectrum coverage
Sources: USCIS newsroom & Policy Manual · DOS Visa Bulletin & visa news · DOL/OFLC & FLAG · Federal Register (DHS, USCIS, DOS, DOL, EOIR, CBP, ICE) · OIRA · USCIS AAO · BIA precedent & EOIR · SCOTUS and circuit courts · ICE/CBP · AILA · Fragomen, BAL, Ogletree, Greenberg Traurig, Jackson Lewis, Fisher Phillips, Seyfarth, Morgan Lewis · Cyrus Mehta · ImmigrationProf · NLR/JD Supra
Deadline calendar · next 60 days
| Date | Item | Type |
|---|---|---|
| Tue Sep 15 | Effective — fixed period of admission replaces duration of status for F, J and I (91 FR 44976). Motion under advisement in D. Mass. since Sep 3; no ruling confirmed through Sep 13. | Effective date |
| Tue Sep 15 | Form I-539 and Form I-765 editions 09/15/26 mandatory. No grace period. | Form edition |
| Fri Sep 18 | Effective — public charge final rule (FR 2026-14539) and revised 8 USCIS-PM Part G. Reaches EB-1 and EB-2 adjustment applicants postmarked or e-filed on or after this date. | Effective date |
| Fri Sep 18 | Form I-485 edition 09/18/26 mandatory per the August 19 USCIS alert. The Forms Updates page still shows a 09/04/26 edition with 01/20/25 accepted; the two pages conflict. Verify on the I-485 page the morning of filing. | Form edition |
| Sun Sep 20 | Proclamation 10973 ($100,000 H-1B entry payment) lapses on its own terms unless extended; some firms compute Sep 21. The implementing policy remains vacated by D. Mass. either way. | Expiry |
| Thu Sep 24 | Comments close — DHS NPRM imposing a $103,265 fee on cap-subject H-1B petitions (FR 2026-17324, RIN 1615-AD20). Table 13 was corrected September 10 without reopening the period. | Comment |
| Fri Sep 25 | Status conference — Red Eagle Law, L.C. v. Edlow, N.D. Cal. No. 3:26-cv-04850-CRB, on adjudication of the certified class's applications. Date carried from last week; the docket could not be re-read. | Court deadline |
| Mon Sep 28 | Comments close — EOIR NPRM, civil money penalty for contempt of an immigration judge (FR 2026-15458). The affirmative asylum referral IFR (FR 2026-15190) is also reported to close this date; the FR record returns no comment-close value. | Comment |
| Wed Sep 30 | FY2026 ends. Last day USCIS accepts the 10/17/24 edition of Form I-864. DV-2026 entitlement ends with no rollover. DOS still warns EB-1 India and EB-2 may retrogress or go unavailable before this date. | Visa numbers / Form edition |
| Thu Oct 1 | FY2027 visa numbers open. Only the 08/24/26 I-864 editions accepted. Washington's I-9 employee-notice law (2SHB 2105) takes effect. | Effective date |
| Sun Oct 4 | Massachusetts PROTECT Act — covered healthcare providers must adopt a written law-enforcement-interaction policy. | Compliance |
| Mon Oct 5 | Comments close — DHS interim final rule on LPR registration for U.S.-born children of foreign government employees (FR 2026-18345). Supreme Court October Term 2026 opens. | Comment / Court |
| Tue Oct 13 | Comments close — DHS mandatory electronic filing IFR (FR 2026-16313); USCIS E-Verify collection revision (FR 2026-18465); EOIR Form EOIR-59 (FR 2026-18622). The Genalo v. Black argument previously set for this date was vacated. | Comment |
| Mon Oct 19 | Auto-extended Sudan and Ukraine TPS EADs expire. DOL/ETA Wagner-Peyser staffing final rule effective (FR 2026-16982). | Effective date |
| Tue Oct 20 | Comments close — DHS Genealogy Program NPRM (FR 2026-17119) | Comment |
| Mon Oct 26 | Effective — rescission of the EO 11246 implementing regulations (FR 2026-17114) | Effective date |
| Tue Oct 27 | Comments close — DOS NPRM expanding online passport renewal to applicants overseas (FR 2026-17655) | Comment |
| Mon Nov 9 | Form I-129 edition 02/27/26 rejected if postmarked or e-filed on or after this date. Only the 09/09/26 edition survives. Reaches every O-1, O-2, P-1A and P-1S filing. | Form edition |
| Tue Nov 10 | Comments close — DHS NPRM eliminating the discretionary 60-day grace period (FR 2026-18631, RIN 1615-AD22, DHS Docket USCIS-2026-0364). Regulations.gov only. | Comment |
| Fri Nov 13 | Comments close — USCIS information collections for Form I-140 (FR 2026-18672), Form I-539 (FR 2026-18688), Form I-290B (FR 2026-18685), Form I-192/e-SAFE (FR 2026-18683) and Form I-212 (FR 2026-18684) | Comment |
1 · Action Required
Seven itemsDuration of status takes effect tomorrow with the preliminary injunction still undecided
The fixed-period-of-admission rule at 91 FR 44976 replaces duration of status for F, J and I nonimmigrants, caps admission at four years, forces extension-of-status filings, and restricts changing educational objective, transferring institutions and adding programs. The consolidated APA challenge brought by NAFSA, the Presidents' Alliance and co-plaintiffs was heard on September 3 on both a preliminary injunction and a § 705 stay, with twenty state attorneys general filing amicus on August 25. NAFSA's litigation page, last dated September 9, and the Presidents' Alliance page, dated September 10, both report no ruling. Nothing on the docket through September 13 could be independently confirmed this week — CourtListener returned empty on every attempt — so treat the absence of a ruling as unverified rather than established.
The reported courtroom remarks are unchanged from last week and remain summary-sourced: the court described the irreparable-harm exposure as enormous, said it was struggling to see a rational connection between a four-year cap and a handful of isolated incidents, and floated a brief TRO to buy time past September 15. No transcript was read.
NAFSA litigation page, updated Sept 9·Presidents' Alliance, updated Sept 10·Final rule, 91 FR 44976
Form I-129: a new 09/09/26 edition, and the biometric entry-exit fee now reaches every covered-employer extension
USCIS published a revised Form I-129 dated 09/09/26, together with a reissued Form G-1055 fee schedule of the same date, in connection with the 9-11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee final rule. The I-129 page states that USCIS will accept the 02/27/26 edition only if postmarked or electronically submitted before November 9, 2026, and will reject it on or after that date. This is the firm's most mechanically consequential form change of the quarter: every O-1A, O-2, P-1A and P-1S petition runs on the I-129.
The underlying rule, published August 10 and effective September 9, amends 8 C.F.R. § 106.2(c)(8) and (c)(9) to replace "certain petitioners" with "all petitioners." The $4,000 H-1B and $4,500 L-1 fee now attaches to all extension-of-status petitions filed by a covered employer — one with 50 or more U.S. employees, more than half of whom are in H-1B, L-1A or L-1B status — including same-employer extensions where no fraud prevention and detection fee is due. Amended petitions that do not seek an extension are exempt. CBP states the fee will not apply retroactively to past or pending petitions; it sunsets for petitions filed after September 30, 2027. The dollar figures in the reissued G-1055 were not independently verified against the form.
USCIS Forms Updates·USCIS Form I-129 page (edition rules)·Final rule, FR 2026-16231
DHS proposes to eliminate the 60-day grace period, and O-1 is on the list
The rule that has been sitting at OIRA since August 27 published on September 11. DHS proposes to remove 8 C.F.R. § 214.1(l)(2), the discretionary up-to-60-day period created by the 2016 AC21 rule at 81 FR 82398, for principals and dependents in E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, O-1 and TN. Under the proposal they "would be considered to be immediately failing to maintain their nonimmigrant status the day after the principal alien's employment or activity ceases," with deportability under INA § 237(a)(1)(C)(i). DHS expressly rejected the alternatives of shortening the period or limiting elimination to some classifications, and a conforming revision to 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(p)(1)(i) strips the grace-period cross-reference out of compelling-circumstances EAD eligibility. No grandfathering or applicability cutoff is stated. The 10-day periods at § 214.1(l)(1) survive, but DHS notes they run only after the validity period ends and so would not reach a worker whose employment ceases mid-validity. More than 6,000 comments were already on the docket at the time of this check.
For this practice the O-1 exposure is the point. An H-1B worker can port under 8 C.F.R. § 274a.12(b)(9); an O-1 beneficiary cannot, and may work for a new employer only once a new non-frivolous I-129 is approved. Eliminating the grace period would leave a terminated O-1 beneficiary with no lawful window in which to file a change of employer, an I-539, an I-485 or a compelling-circumstances I-765 — the four filings the grace period currently enables. The question DHS does not address, and which is worth raising in a comment, is how cessation of qualifying activity would be measured for an agent-filed O-1 with an intermittent itinerary, where gaps between engagements are structural rather than a loss of employment. P-1 is not among the listed classifications. Nothing has changed yet; the 60-day period remains in force through the rulemaking.
NPRM, FR 2026-18631·Fragomen, Sept 10·BAL, Sept 11·Ogletree Beltway Buzz, Sept 11·AILA, Sept 11 (Doc. 26091171)
Form I-485: the September 18 edition cliff, with USCIS's own pages in conflict
The August 19 USCIS alert stated that a 09/18/26 edition of Form I-485 would publish on September 18 and that older editions would be rejected from that date, aligned to the public charge final rule taking effect the same day. The Forms Updates page checked this week instead shows a 09/04/26 edition published September 4 with the 01/20/25 edition still accepted. The two USCIS pages disagree and the conflict was not resolved this week. There is no grace period and no RFE safety net on an I-485 edition error: a wrong edition is a rejection, and for an EB-1A or NIW concurrent filing a rejection can cost the priority-date lock and, for an applicant near the end of nonimmigrant status, the § 245 window.
AILA has separately warned that an online I-485 should not be filed at the last minute: the myUSCIS account timestamps in UTC rather than local time, and the form can only be filed online as a PDF upload, which takes time to process and has produced receipt-notice delays.
USCIS Forms Updates·USCIS Form I-485 page·Public charge final rule, FR 2026-14539
The $103,265 H-1B cap fee NPRM was corrected on September 10; the September 24 comment deadline stands
DHS issued a one-page technical correction replacing Table 13 of the August 25 NPRM at 91 FR 54817, the table of I-129 H-1B receipts for FY2021 through FY2025. The corrected figures show 2,143,206 total H-1B receipts and 483,750 cap-subject receipts over the five years, averaging roughly 96,750 a year. The correction contains no DATES section, does not change the proposed fee, and does not reopen the comment period. The underlying proposal — a $103,265 fee on cap-subject petitions, inapplicable to cap-exempt, extension, amendment and change-of-employer filings — is summary-sourced; the August 25 NPRM was not read at length. AILA has an open call to action opposing it.
Correction, FR Doc. C1-2026-17324·AILA action alert, Sept 8 (Doc. 26090807)
H-2B cap reached for the first half of FY2027; final receipt date September 4
USCIS received enough petitions to reach the congressionally mandated H-2B cap for the first half of fiscal year 2027. Cap-subject petitions received after September 4, 2026 requesting a start date before April 1, 2027 will be rejected. No supplemental allocation has been announced for the first half.
Form I-864: the grace period closes September 30
No change this week. Following the September 3 APA and Paperwork Reduction Act suit by AILA and Benach Pitney Reilly in the District of Columbia over the same-day, after-hours mandatory edition change, USCIS granted a 30-day grace period: the 10/17/24 edition of Forms I-864, I-864A and I-864EZ is accepted through September 30, and from October 1 only the 08/24/26 editions. A superseded edition filed on or after October 1 is treated as missing initial evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(8) — an RFE, not a lost filing date. The docket number of the suit was not located and its status after the reversal remains unknown.
USCIS Form I-864 page·Cyrus Mehta / CDMP, Sept 10·Miller Mayer, Sept 9
2 · Notable
Eight itemsSupreme Court dismisses Genalo v. Black as moot; the prolonged-detention question stays open
The Solicitor General notified the Clerk of mootness on September 11, the parties filed a joint stipulation to dismiss the same day, and the Court dismissed that afternoon. Mootness arose because Governor Hochul pardoned respondent Keisy G.M.'s New York assault conviction in late August, ending deportability and mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c); the co-respondent had already departed. The question presented — whether prolonged § 1226(c) detention triggers a Fifth Amendment right to a bond hearing, and who bears the burden — remains open, as it has since Jennings v. Rodriguez. The Second Circuit's pro-detainee ruling stands as circuit law, and the Solicitor General stated DOJ intends to return with a new petition. The October sitting opens October 5; October 13 now holds only Beaird v. United States.
Thirty-day RFE response windows are now being observed in the field
Greenberg Traurig reports from its own docket that USCIS bulk-transferred a large volume of pending EB-5-based I-485s from the California Service Center to the Texas Service Center, and that applicants are receiving Form I-693 medical RFEs immediately after transfer. Two anomalies: RFEs demanding a replacement medical even where fewer than two years have run since the civil surgeon signed, so the existing I-693 should still be facially valid; and response windows of 30 days rather than the customary 84 to 87. GT ties this to the August 2026 USCIS guidance authorizing shortened response deadlines and broader officer discretion to deny a deficient filing without an RFE or NOID.
The category is EB-5, but the shortened-deadline authority is not category-specific. This is the clearest evidence yet that the August guidance is operationally live rather than aspirational, and it lands alongside American Immigration Council data, relayed by ImmigrationProf on September 13, showing the USCIS backlog worsening in FY2026 Q2 even as filings fell sharply year over year — a backlog growing while intake drops is direct evidence of slower per-case adjudication.
BIA volume 30 opens with Matter of Diji, overruling Matter of G-Y-R- on NTA service
The Board held that DHS may mail a notice to appear to the most recent address the noncitizen provided, overruling Matter of G-Y-R-. Three further volume 30 decisions posted September 10: Matter of A-E-V-M-, 30 I&N Dec. 20 (Maduro's removal from power constitutes changed country conditions in Venezuela); Matter of S-K-E-, 30 I&N Dec. 27 (CAT and sexual-orientation corroboration); and Matter of Kamalov, 30 I&N Dec. 34 (bond and danger to the community). The EOIR volume 29 page was last modified September 2 and carried nothing new in the window; the volume 30 decisions were identified through AILA's posting rather than read at source, so the holdings above are summary-sourced and the citations should be confirmed before use.
Two standing items from August that bear on employment-based practice have not changed and are worth repeating for anyone who has not yet issued the client advisory. Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, 29 I&N Dec. 830 (BIA Aug. 13, 2026), overruled Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly: a departure under advance parole is a departure for purposes of INA § 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II). The Board applied the rule prospectively only under the Cordero-Garcia retroactivity factors. And Matter of A-Q-R-K-, 29 I&N Dec. 865, was designated precedent by Attorney General order dated September 1 — six weeks after it was decided, which is a reminder that the AG is retroactively designating panel decisions under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(g)(3) and that the volume table alone is not a sufficient watch.
AILA recent postings, Sept 9–10·EOIR volume 29·Matter of Delcarmen-Lara (PDF)
DOS updates diversity and immigrant visa processing after two adverse decisions
The Department has updated its public guidance following the August 21 S.D.N.Y. vacatur in CLINIC v. Rubio of the January 2026 cable suspending immigrant visa issuance to nationals of 75 countries on public-charge-risk grounds, and the August 28 N.D. Cal. class-certification and injunction order in Medani v. Trump on DV-2026. DOS confirms neither pause is in effect. The practical gap is the point: posts need time to implement, and cases still face public charge review, administrative processing, security checks, visa-number limits and post capacity.
Robinson Immigration Law's September 8 analysis of CLINIC is the most rigorous piece published in the window and identifies the two transferable holdings. First, consular nonreviewability does not bar a challenge to a department-wide policy that predetermines the outcome and strips the officer of discretion. Second, DOS misused INA § 221(g) as a general-purpose refusal vehicle for otherwise-qualified applicants. The court distinguished Trump v. Hawaii as an entry-authority rather than issuance-authority case, and did not disturb public-charge review or presidential entry restrictions.
Salvadoran TPS expired September 9 with no announcement, and no I-9 guidance
DHS has said only that "an announcement will be made at the appropriate time" and that Salvadorans retain protection including employment authorization pending it; USCIS reposted that language to its El Salvador TPS page. This supersedes the practical effect of an August 12 update saying Salvadoran TPS EADs would be valid only through September 9. Seyfarth offers the 2025 Honduras sequence as the predictive model: designation expired July 5, termination was announced July 7 and published July 8, and because DHS must give 60 days' notice in the Federal Register, beneficiaries kept status and work authorization 63 days past expiry.
Birth tourism: EO 14418 is enjoined, EO 14419 is not, and it drops the word "primary"
EO 14418, published August 11, names four categories of U.S.-born children the administration says do not acquire citizenship at birth — children of "alien enemies" defined to reach designated FTO members and SDGTs, children of foreign government employees extended well beyond accredited diplomats, children of birth-tourism participants, and children born in certain U.S. territories — and states the list is non-exhaustive. Judge Boardman preliminarily enjoined EO 14418 only on September 2 in CASA, Inc. v. Trump, No. 8:25-cv-00201 (D. Md.). EO 14419, Ending Birth Tourism, remains in effect. Its operative change is a single deleted word: the prior DOS standard asked whether giving birth was the primary purpose of the trip; EO 14419 asks whether it was any purpose, and it reaches retroactively to anyone who "previously engaged" in birth tourism. Consequences run from visa denial and revocation to refused entry, removal and permanent bars. No DOS or DHS implementing guidance has issued.
DHS is simultaneously operationalizing the theory by regulation. The interim final rule at FR 2026-18345, published September 9 and effective September 4, implements § 2(b) of EO 14418 by replacing "foreign diplomatic officer" with a far broader "foreign government employee" definition at 8 C.F.R. § 101.3(a)(1), and USCIS issued the paired Policy Manual update on September 9 at 7 USCIS-PM O.3 and 12 USCIS-PM A.2. DHS states it will not implement the rule as to the certified CASA class. The posture — effective five days before publication, on foreign-affairs and good-cause exceptions — invites its own APA challenge. Comments close October 5.
Shumaker Loop & Kendrick, Sept 9·IFR, FR 2026-18345·USCIS Policy Manual updates
Two states imposed I-9 inspection notice duties in the same week
Governor Healey issued implementing guidance on September 8 for the Massachusetts PROTECT Act, effective August 5. An employer receiving a DHS or ICE notice of inspection must deliver individual written notice to each affected employee in that employee's primary language within 48 hours — a breakroom or intranet posting does not satisfy it. The Act also limits state and local participation in civil immigration enforcement and restricts civil arrests in nonpublic areas of state property. Covered healthcare providers must adopt a written law-enforcement-interaction policy by October 4.
Washington's Immigrant Worker Protection Act, 2SHB 2105, takes effect October 1 and reaches every employer with at least one Washington worker: written notice within five business days both before an inspection (a copy of the federal notice of inspection, the agency name, receipt date, records sought, and contact information for an AG-approved immigrant-rights organization) and after written results are received, with proof of transmission and redaction of other workers' data. Statutory damages are $500 per failed notice, doubled if willful, with a private right of action. Colorado HB 26-1283, already in force since June 3, separately bars employers from demanding, confiscating or retaining a worker's passport or green card other than temporarily while completing the I-9, and adds a written notice and signed acknowledgment requirement in the worker's primary language.
Ogletree on the PROTECT Act, Sept 12·Ogletree on Washington, Sept 12·Morgan Lewis on Colorado, Sept 9
First removal through the Alien Terrorist Removal Court
DOJ announced the first case ever brought before the U.S. Alien Terrorist Removal Court, established in 1996 and never previously used, in which an Afghan national formerly residing in Fort Worth was removed after conceding alien-terrorist status. No holding is available and the proceeding is not adversarial in the ordinary sense. It is reported here as a structural development in removal practice; there is no employment-based relevance. Summary-sourced from the agency announcement and secondary coverage.
3 · Monitoring
Twelve itemsOctober Visa Bulletin still unpublished; September stands with EB-2 India unavailable and EB-1 India on warning
The DOS bulletin index still lists September as the current bulletin and the upcoming slot reads "Coming Soon," confirmed by direct fetch. September final action dates are unchanged: EB-1 current worldwide, China 01JUL23, India 15OCT22; EB-2 current worldwide, China 01SEP21, India unavailable; EB-3 worldwide 01SEP24. Three warnings in the September bulletin bear directly on EB-1A and NIW practice: Note E, that high India EB-1 demand may make the category unavailable before fiscal year end; Note F, the same for EB-2; and Note C, that dates were advanced because issuance rates fell under Proclamations 10949 and 10998 and retrogression may follow as demand materializes. The FY2026 worldwide EB limit is 186,317 with a per-country ceiling of 28,862. The bulletin is now unusually late — the questions for October are whether EB-2 India returns from unavailable, whether EB-1 India and China move on the new year's numbers, and which chart USCIS designates. September 2026 Visa Bulletin · USCIS chart designation
Proclamation 10973 lapses September 20; no renewal signal yet
The $100,000 H-1B entry payment expires twelve months after its September 21, 2025 effective date unless the President extends it; firms compute the lapse as September 20 or 21. The implementing policy was vacated by D. Mass. in State of California v. Noem on June 8 as an unconstitutional tax imposed without congressional authorization, and the First Circuit denied an emergency stay on July 24, so the vacatur stands pending the merits appeal. Chamber of Commerce v. DHS, D.D.C., went the other way on December 23, 2025, upholding the proclamation under INA § 212(f), and is on appeal to the D.C. Circuit. A circuit split is forming and emergency relief could revive the payment. Operationally USCIS and DOS cannot assess it today. Summary-sourced. Littler ASAP
Red Eagle and Medani: the N.D. Cal. is unwinding the PM-602-019x hold memos one by one
Red Eagle Law, L.C. v. Edlow, No. 3:26-cv-04850-CRB, certified a class and enjoined PM-602-0192 and PM-602-0194 on August 24, ordering USCIS to adjudicate "in the normal course." The class covers nationals of the 39 countries listed in Proclamations 10949 or 10998, and the Palestinian Authority, with a benefit application subject to the hold unadjudicated at certification. Medani v. Trump temporarily vacated PM-602-0193 on diversity visa adjustments on August 28. No September development could be confirmed: the CourtListener docket returned empty and the USCIS compliance alert page returned an empty body twice. One secondary source reports the named plaintiffs' applications were ordered decided within 30 days, i.e. around September 23 — unconfirmed. Docket a check on every EB-1A, NIW, O-1 or P-1 file for a national of a designated country; if nothing has moved by late September, the class order is the hook for a status inquiry. Red Eagle docket
PERM is a 336-day queue, which is the comparative argument for NIW
BAL's September 9 snapshot: DOL is adjudicating PERM applications filed November 2025 and earlier, with average analyst review in August 2026 at 336 calendar days; reconsideration appeals from April 2026 and earlier; NPWC processing prevailing wage requests filed May 2026 and earlier for both H-1B and PERM, OEWS and non-OEWS; redeterminations from June 2026; Center Director Review for PERM from June 2026 and H-1B from July 2026. Stacked, the prevailing wage queue plus a 336-day PERM is roughly a two-year front end before an EB-2 I-140 is even filed. That is the number to put in front of a client who has a willing employer sponsor and is weighing PERM against a self-petitioned NIW. OFLC published nothing in the window; its most recent announcement remains the September 2 notice complying with the August 26 order in United Farm Workers v. DOL, No. 25-cv-01614 (E.D. Cal.), on H-2A AEWR back-wage exposure. BAL, Sept 9 · OFLC news
The Form I-140 information collection is open for comment through November 13
USCIS published roughly thirty Paperwork Reduction Act notices on September 14. Two matter here: Form I-140, extension without change, FR 2026-18672, and Form I-539, FR 2026-18688, both closing November 13. Also in the batch: Form I-290B, notice of appeal or motion, FR 2026-18685; Forms I-192 and e-SAFE, FR 2026-18683; Form I-212, FR 2026-18684, all closing the same day; and Form I-751, FR 2026-18736, closing October 14. These are procedural extensions rather than substantive rule changes, and the I-192 and I-212 notices are expressly extensions without change, so no adverse shift is signaled for O-1 or P-1 clients relying on § 212(d)(3) waivers. The I-140 docket is nonetheless the one to watch for any proposed form revision. Supporting statements were not opened. I-140 notice, FR 2026-18672
The E-Verify collection revision does not say what it revises
USCIS submitted a revision of the E-Verify program collection to OMB on September 10 (FR 2026-18465, OMB 1615-0092, Docket USCIS-2007-0023, Form G-1617), opening a 30-day window closing October 13. The notice is labeled a revision but does not describe the substantive changes; the only pointer is a Regulations.gov supporting document, "Summary of Changes 07.31.2026," at USCIS-2007-0023-0103. Separately, Foley & Lardner reports that DHS expanded the E-Verify Status Change Report to cover additional revocation types, and that ICE has moved categories of I-9 deficiency previously treated as technical and correctable into the immediately fineable bucket — the reclassification is the substantive development and is summary-sourced. Pull the change summary before the comment window closes. FR 2026-18465 · Foley & Lardner, Sept 8
Mandatory e-filing IFR closes October 13
The interim final rule at FR 2026-16313, effective August 11, lets USCIS mandate electronic filing for benefit requests that have been available online for 180 days or more, with a waiver process. For a practice that files paper I-129 and I-140 packages with voluminous exhibit binders, a mandate would be a workflow change of real size, and the waiver mechanics are where the comment value lies. Comments close October 13. FR 2026-16313
Signature formalism as a rejection vector Member-gated
Sherry Neal, writing in the AILA Law Journal on September 10, argues that USCIS's tightened signature requirements are producing rejections and denials driven by procedural formality rather than substantive ineligibility. Self-petitioned I-140s and agent-filed I-129s with a G-28 are exactly the filings where this shows up. Only the abstract is public; the full text is a member benefit. Worth a look at the firm's wet-ink and signature intake protocol regardless of whether the article is obtained. AILA Law Journal, Sept 10
O-1A evidence mapping in cybersecurity, and what it teaches about artifacts generally
Colombo & Hurd published a criterion-mapping piece on September 11 whose useful passage concerns original contributions of major significance: a CVE identifier documents a disclosed vulnerability but does not by itself establish major significance. The petition has to supply the surrounding record — independent advisories, vendor patch notes, technical write-ups, third-party reporting, evidence of industry response and defensive implementation — and the same distinction extends to security tools, detection methods, protocols, open-source projects and patents. The point translates directly to the EB-1A original-contributions criterion and models the adversarial framing to anticipate in an RFE: the artifact exists, so what. It is firm marketing content; persuasive, not authoritative. Colombo & Hurd via NLR, Sept 11
The "Gold Card" is live, and it is a client-diversion risk
ImmigrationProf reported on September 10 that a government site is now taking applications for the Gold Card: a $15,000 DHS processing fee plus a $1 million contribution after background approval, marketed on speed. The legal authority for the program is unconfirmed and was not traced this week. Flagged because it will be raised by high-net-worth EB-1A and NIW prospects, and because the answer to "should I just do this instead" requires knowing what the statutory basis is before it is given. ImmigrationProf, Sept 10
Enforcement monetization: notices of violation, not notices of intent to fine Member-gated
Gunda Brost, writing on the AILA blog September 8 (Doc. No. 26090806, publicly accessible), documents a shift from notices of intent to fine toward notices of violation, which assess the penalty immediately rather than giving advance notice, with a short contest window. Regulatory changes shortened notice periods, authorized service by regular mail rather than personal service, and compressed administrative challenge deadlines. Failure-to-depart penalties accrue at roughly $1,000 a day and have reached about $1.9 million in some cases with no explanation of the calculation. Defenses run to willfulness, the validity of the voluntary departure agreement, the statute of limitations and VAWA protections; class litigation is pending in Maria L. v. Noem. The crossover for this practice is employer-side: an O-1 or P-1 petitioner that is also an I-9 inspection target will receive these as bills and needs to be told they are legal proceedings with hard deadlines. AILA blog, Sept 8
Outbound: UK sponsor management MFA, and ETIAS still not open
Mandatory multi-factor authentication applies to all UK Sponsor Management System users from September 3, with the phased rollout concluding in November 2026; the Level 2 user role was discontinued from September 9, with existing Level 2 users to be upgraded or deactivated by March 8, 2027, and inactive accounts purged. UK right-to-work changes take effect October 1. Separately, Cozen O'Connor reports ETIAS is still targeted for Q4 2026 with no announced date and applications not yet open, followed by transitional and grace periods of at least six months each; the firm warns against sites claiming applications are currently open. Both matter for O-1 and P-1 clients travelling to Europe for engagements and competitions and for EB-1A beneficiaries doing conference work. Ogletree, Sept 8
Adjudication trend · AAO
August postings arrive in EB-1A, NIW and PThe August batch has landed. Decisions dated August 5 and 6 are now posted in EB-1A, NIW and the P categories — the first movement in EB-1A since July 22 and in P since April 2. Nothing has posted for O-1. The EB-1A and NIW decisions below were read in full from the decision PDFs; the repository still returns 403 to fetchers and the landing page's "Most Recent Decisions" widget renders a stale October 2021 fallback, so category listings were reached by other means. The dominant theme across categories is the same one that has been building all summer: employer and client letters are being discounted as not independent, and the AAO is distinguishing field-level impact from employer-level benefit at every turn. New this month is that the AAO is doing its own evidence forensics.
EB-1A — Extraordinary Ability
Three decisions dated August 6. In Re: 42213327 is the one to read. A Brazilian IT consultant claimed seven criteria; the AAO credited only (vi) scholarly articles and dismissed at Kazarian step one without reaching final merits. An internal "Local Phase" company award failed because it was limited to one employer's staff — the regulation requires recognition of the award itself, not of the issuer, citing Krasniqi v. Dibbins, 558 F. Supp. 3d 168, 183 (D.N.J. 2021). ACM membership failed because qualification is a bachelor's degree or two years' experience and post-admission activity does not retroactively supply an outstanding-achievement requirement. Original contributions failed because the support was almost entirely letters from the petitioner's own employers and clients, "not independent evidence." Leading or critical role failed for want of evidence of the employers' distinguished reputation.
The AAO also entered a willful misrepresentation finding. It ran WHOIS and ICANN lookups on two "media" articles submitted in RFE response, found the domains registered fifteen minutes apart on April 30, 2024 — after filing — and used sequential article-URL numbering to date the content, defeating claimed 2014 and 2023 publication dates. A post-NOID withdrawal was held untimely under Matter of M-, 9 I&N Dec. 118, and Matter of Namio, 14 I&N Dec. 412, because it followed exposure. Two sub-holdings run the other way and are worth quoting in briefs: professional publications under (vi) "need not be major publications," and citation history is a final-merits question, not an initial-criterion question — the service center had improperly used low citation counts to defeat the criterion outright. The two companion decisions are procedural wins. In Re: 43939440 withdrew a denial and remanded where the service center found three criteria satisfied and then wrote that the petitioner "does not meet at least three," skipping final merits; the AAO directed that the final merits weigh all claimed criteria plus "any other potentially relevant evidence in the record (including evidence that does not fit one of the evidentiary criteria)." In Re: 43732628 withdrew an untimely-motion dismissal: the decision issued November 28, 2025 and the I-290B was received December 30, thirty-two days later, inside the 33-day mail window of 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.5(a)(1)(i) and 103.8(b).
Drafting consequences. Verify every third-party press item independently before filing — domain age and registration date are now things the AAO checks. Affirmatively argue in the petition that citation counts and outlet prestige belong at final merits. Plead the employer's distinguished reputation with sourced evidence — funding, customer scale, independent coverage — not traffic screenshots. And always file delivery confirmation with an I-290B.
EB-2 NIW — National Interest Waiver
In Re: 43764193, August 6, is the most drafting-relevant decision of the month. An AI and semiconductor wafer-defect researcher; the service center conceded the underlying EB-2 classification and denied the waiver, and the AAO dismissed on Dhanasar prong one alone, expressly reserving prongs two and three. Five holdings. First, the petitioner "misreads the showing required": Dhanasar rested on evidence about Dr. Dhanasar's own proposed work, not the importance of aerospace generally, so SIA and Statista industry data "does not contain any information about the work in which he proposes to engage." Second, letters reciting past publications do not support prong one because "our focus is forward-looking." Third, attenuated causal chains were rejected as a "butterfly effect" theory of causation, citing United States v. Wang, 222 F.3d 234, 239 (6th Cir. 2000). Fourth, alignment with a national initiative or policy priority is not dispositive — otherwise "almost any activity in a favored field" would qualify. Fifth, post-filing evidence was rejected under 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(1) and (b)(12), now citing Delaware Valley Reg'l Ctr. v. DHS, 106 F.4th 1195 (D.C. Cir. 2024) alongside Izummi and Katigbak.
The AAO also caught a self-inflicted contradiction that is worth internalizing. The personal statement said the endeavor "is in no way connected to any one employer or role," while the RFE-stage employment letter leaned on that employer's work to establish national importance. The AAO wrote that the petitioner "should not claim to benefit from completely divorcing the endeavor from his work, while also being able to rely on that same employment." Strip endeavor-independence boilerplate from the personal statement wherever the employer letter is carrying prong-one weight — the AAO now reads the two documents against each other. Letters must describe the future endeavor's field-level impact, not the beneficiary's publication history. Industry-size statistics and CHIPS-Act-style policy alignment are now affirmatively unhelpful padding. A second August 6 NIW decision, AUG062026_02B5203, was retrieved but not read; nothing is reported from it.
O-1A — Extraordinary Ability (Nonimmigrant)
Nothing posted. The D8 directory name was confirmed correct by successfully retrieving a December 11, 2025 decision, but every probe into the 2026 subdirectory returned 404, including on dates demonstrably active in other categories (August 5 and 6, July 1, March 10 and 12) and roughly twenty others. The working conclusion is that no 2026 O-1 decision has been posted to the repository at all. That is inconsistent with last week's note of a June 17 decision, which could not be re-confirmed this week; treat the earlier entry as unverified rather than superseded. Do not cite an O-1A non-precedent decision without re-checking the directory first. The O-1A development that matters this week is regulatory, not adjudicative: the grace period NPRM in Section 1.
P-1A — Internationally Recognized Athlete
No P-1A athlete decision has posted. The only two D9 decisions in the 2026 folder are companion P-3 culturally unique cases against the same petitioner, a festival-services organization seeking twenty-five Chinese lantern artisans. In In Re: 43711396 and In Re: 43592564, both August 5, the service center had denied on the ground that lantern artisans are not artists developing, interpreting, representing, coaching or teaching a performance under 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(p)(6)(i)(A) — but the AAO dismissed on a different and dispositive ground: the events had already occurred. Requested employment ran February 19 to July 2, 2026 and February 6 to June 25, 2026 respectively, so the beneficiaries could not come "temporarily and solely to perform" under INA § 101(a)(15)(P)(iii).
The mootness holding applies to P-1A with equal force. Where a season or event window is closing, an amended petition with forward-looking dates or a refiling beats an appeal that runs out the clock — the AAO will not reach the classification question once the validity period has lapsed. Note also that the pair cites the 2026 and 2025 editions of § 214.2(p) respectively; confirm which regulatory edition governs the filing date.
Read in full. The Federal Register documents for the 60-day grace period NPRM (2026-18631), the 9-11 biometric fee final rule (2026-16231), the H-1B fee correction (C1-2026-17324), the foreign-government-employee IFR (2026-18345), the E-Verify collection revision (2026-18465), the mandatory e-filing IFR (2026-16313) and the I-192/e-SAFE notice (2026-18683), all retrieved from the Federal Register API by direct request; the USCIS Forms Updates, I-129, I-140, I-485, Policy Manual updates, premium processing and H-2B cap alert pages, read through a live browser; the September 2026 Visa Bulletin and the DOS visa news index; the DOL/OFLC announcements page; the EOIR volume 29 page and notices-and-press-releases page; Matter of Delcarmen-Lara and Matter of A-Q-R-K- from the EOIR PDFs; the EB-1A decisions 42213327, 43939440 and 43732628, the NIW decision 43764193 and the two P-3 decisions, all from the decision PDFs; SCOTUSblog on the Genalo dismissal; and the firm and blog pages of Greenberg Traurig, Ogletree, BAL, Fragomen, Seyfarth, Morgan Lewis, Shumaker, Robinson Immigration Law, Cyrus Mehta / CDMP, Colombo & Hurd, Miller Mayer, NAFSA and the Presidents' Alliance cited above.
Blocked sources and workarounds. uscis.gov returns HTTP 403 (Akamai) to automated fetchers across the newsroom, Policy Manual, forms pages and the entire /sites/default/files/err/ decision tree; all USCIS content was read through a live browser, so there is no USCIS coverage gap this week. The AAO landing page's "Most Recent Decisions" widget serves a stale October 2021 fallback and should not be trusted. The Federal Register API refused the fetch tool and was reached by direct request. dol.gov and travel.state.gov reject curl but were retrievable by fetch. CourtListener returned empty on both the D. Mass. duration-of-status docket and the Red Eagle docket. The USCIS "recent court order on hold policies" alert page returned an empty body twice. dhs.gov/news returned HTTP 200 with an empty body twice, so DHS press activity for the week is not covered. ice.gov/newsroom returned undated stale content and cbp.gov served a cached 2023–2024 page, so ICE and CBP press activity for the week is not covered; search results suggested ICE releases on September 10 and 11 that could not be retrieved or dated. The circuit courts' daily opinion indexes could not be browsed, so circuit coverage this week is incomplete rather than empty. Fragomen's insights index serves a cached January 14, 2026 build and JD Supra's index served a September 2024 cache; both were worked around through live page loads, and every date in this brief was taken from publisher metadata or the article page rather than from a search summary. AILA's research library is a JavaScript application that returns nothing to plain fetch; coverage came from the recent-postings pages, which reported inconsistent totals, so a small number of gated items may be missing.
Summary-sourced. Judge Saylor's September 3 remarks, from NAFSA, the Presidents' Alliance and press accounts, with no transcript read. The absence of a ruling in the duration-of-status case through September 13, from the parties' litigation pages dated September 9 and 10. The volume 30 BIA decisions — Diji, A-E-V-M-, S-K-E- and Kamalov — identified through AILA postings; none was read at source and the citations should be confirmed before use. The substance of the $103,265 H-1B fee proposal, from firm commentary; the August 25 NPRM was not read. The Red Eagle and Medani orders and their September status. The First Circuit stay denial and the D.D.C. ruling in the Proclamation 10973 litigation, from Littler. CLINIC v. Rubio and CASA, Inc. v. Trump, from firm analysis rather than the opinions. The reissued G-1055 fee amounts. The DOJ Alien Terrorist Removal Court announcement. The ICE reclassification of I-9 deficiencies, from Foley & Lardner.
Member-gated. The AILA Law Journal article on signature scrutiny (abstract only); AILA's practice pointer on the Supreme Court's review of DOL H-2A monetary-enforcement authority (Doc. 26091003); AILA's Practice Pulse 2011–2025 (Doc. 26082707); and the AILA postings of the volume 30 BIA decisions and the roughly fifteen circuit decisions posted September 10 and 11, including the Ninth Circuit's Garcia Morales v. Blanche on the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Rule. Titles, dates and document numbers were captured; no gated text was read.
Not confirmed. Whether any order issued in the duration-of-status case on September 11, 12 or 13. The Form I-485 edition conflict between the August 19 USCIS alert and the Forms Updates page — unresolved, and the reason that item carries a flag. The comment deadline for the affirmative asylum referral IFR (FR 2026-15190); the Federal Register record returns no comment-close value. Whether the named plaintiffs in Red Eagle were ordered to be adjudicated within 30 days. The September 25 Red Eagle status conference date, carried from last week without a docket re-read. Whether any 2026 O-1 decision exists in the AAO repository, and the status of the June 17 decision noted last week. The October 2026 Visa Bulletin, unpublished at the time of this check. The legal authority for the Gold Card program. Two reported October Term 2026 immigration cert grants — on adjustment eligibility after asylum termination, and on attorney's fees in detention challenges — could not be verified; the Supreme Court's argument calendars are JavaScript-rendered and returned no case data. Whether ImmigrationProf published anything on September 7.
Compiled September 14, 2026 · Bratter PA