Photo of Nataliya Rymer

Nataliya Rymer focuses her practice on employment-based immigration and compliance. She represents clients in a wide range of employment-based immigrant and non-immigrant matters, including professionals, managers and executives, artists and entertainers, treaty traders and investors, immigrant investors, and persons of extraordinary ability.

Nataliya also has experience working with employers on I-9 employment verification matters as well as H-1B and LCA compliance-related issues. She counsels employers on due diligence issues, including internal audits and reviews, as well as minimization of exposure and liabilities in government investigations.

In addition, Nataliya is experienced with family-based immigration and immigration-related federal court litigation issues, as well as waivers of inadmissibility.

It has been reported that President Trump’s administration is likely preparing to effectuate additional changes affecting immigration issues.  Specifically, in addition to the Executive Order executed on Jan. 27, 2017
Continue Reading The Trump Administration Contemplates an Executive Order Affecting Advance Parole

On Feb. 9, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a ruling keeping in force the temporary restraining order (TRO) that was issued last Friday by
Continue Reading U.S. Court of Appeals Declines to Stay Temporary Restraining Order in connection with Executive Order

On Jan. 27, 2017, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order (EO) on Immigration entitled “Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks by Foreign Nationals.” The EO impacts, among many
Continue Reading GT Alert: New Executive Order Impacts Entry to the United States, Visa Issuance, Refugee, and Screening Procedures

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) recently entered into a settlement agreement with three staffing companies in the Memphis, Tennessee area. DOJ’s investigation discovered that each of the companies rejected
Continue Reading I-9 Alert: Department of Justice Settles Immigration Discrimination Claims with Three Memphis Area Staffing Firms

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision in upholding the Board of Immigration Appeals’ restrictive interpretation of the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA). In Scialabba v. Vuellar de Osario, the Court addressed the issue involving immigrant (permanent) petitions on behalf of individuals with dependent children who age out – that is, turn 21 – during the pendency of the petition.

U.S. immigration law allows citizens and lawful U.S. permanent residents to file petitions for immigrant (permanent) visas for qualifying family members, such as spouses, siblings, and children of varying ages – from minors to adults. The individual being sponsored is referred to as a principal beneficiary of the petition; the principal’s spouse, minor child or children (an unmarried child under 21 years of age) are referenced as derivative beneficiaries. Generally, derivative beneficiaries are entitled to have the same immigrant status, in the same order as that granted to the primary beneficiary. The CSPA provides several provisions to protect minor derivative beneficiaries from losing their eligibility for immigrant status as they age while waiting for available visa numbers. This Act enables the freezing of a derivative’s age below 21; converting a petition from one category to another without the need to file a new petition, and the retention of one’s priority date – a place in line for permanent residence – assigned to the initial petition of which the aged-out child was unable to take advantage.

Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Narrowly Interprets Provisions of Child Status Protection Act