samsung pay废了# PDA - 掌中宝
c*x
1 楼
http://immigrationgirl.com/h-4-ead-rule-under-attack-in-same-co
Much attention has been placed on the possible cancellation of the OPT STEM
extension after the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia vacated
the 2008 rule that created the 17-month STEM extension of OPT. The same
court, though a different judge, will soon be looking into the validity of
the H-4 EAD rule that was implemented this past May. Save Jobs USA filed a
lawsuit in April 2015 seeking to stop the H-4 EAD rule from being
implemented. The plaintiff in the lawsuit is a group of computer workers who
were formerly employed at Southern California Edison.
Save Jobs argued that the H-4 EAD should have been issued through
legislation, not through regulation and therefore the rule should be vacated
. The group further alleges that they were displaced by H-1B workers and
will now face even more competition from H-4 EAD holders.
The Department of Homeland Security moved to dismiss the lawsuit on the
grounds that the workers lacked standing to sue, but the court previously
denied that motion in July. It is expected that both sides will seek “
summary judgment” this week, meaning they want the court to decide the case
in their favor without going through a full trial. Save Jobs and DHS will
then have until October 16th to respond to the opposing side’s arguments in
order for the court to make its decision.
The good news for H-4 EAD holders is that the rule that created this EAD
went through the proper notice and comment period before being implemented.
The OPT STEM rule did not, and that was the reason it was struck down.
Hopefully this difference will tip the decision in favor of DHS to keep the
H-4 EAD rule intact.
Much attention has been placed on the possible cancellation of the OPT STEM
extension after the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia vacated
the 2008 rule that created the 17-month STEM extension of OPT. The same
court, though a different judge, will soon be looking into the validity of
the H-4 EAD rule that was implemented this past May. Save Jobs USA filed a
lawsuit in April 2015 seeking to stop the H-4 EAD rule from being
implemented. The plaintiff in the lawsuit is a group of computer workers who
were formerly employed at Southern California Edison.
Save Jobs argued that the H-4 EAD should have been issued through
legislation, not through regulation and therefore the rule should be vacated
. The group further alleges that they were displaced by H-1B workers and
will now face even more competition from H-4 EAD holders.
The Department of Homeland Security moved to dismiss the lawsuit on the
grounds that the workers lacked standing to sue, but the court previously
denied that motion in July. It is expected that both sides will seek “
summary judgment” this week, meaning they want the court to decide the case
in their favor without going through a full trial. Save Jobs and DHS will
then have until October 16th to respond to the opposing side’s arguments in
order for the court to make its decision.
The good news for H-4 EAD holders is that the rule that created this EAD
went through the proper notice and comment period before being implemented.
The OPT STEM rule did not, and that was the reason it was struck down.
Hopefully this difference will tip the decision in favor of DHS to keep the
H-4 EAD rule intact.
