Posts Tagged ‘rfe’

TODAY’S USCIS FORECAST: A Storm of Travel Ban Issues with a Cold Blast of COVID-based RFEs, and a Looming Furlough-Nado!

Saturday, August 22nd, 2020

I. Consulates Are Open, But Now Refusing To Issue Visas To Applicants Who Have Been In Certain Countries

For artists who have been approved for visas, but have been waiting months to apply for them at a U.S. Consulate, many U.S. Consulates have re-opened and are beginning to issue visas. But not so fast…there continues to be a travel ban on foreign nationals entering the U.S. who have been in any of the following countries for 14 days or longer prior to their intended date of entry:

China, Iran, The European Schengen Area (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Monaco, San Marino, Vatican City), the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland), the Republic of Ireland, Brazil, and all of Middle Earth (except Mordor, because Trump is pals with Sauron!)   

Please Note: the travel ban applies to anyone who has been physically present in this countries regardless of citizenship.

U.S. Citizens and green card holders, certain family members, and other individuals entitled to “national interest waivers” and who meet specified exemptions are allowed to enter the U.S., but only through one of 15 designated U.S. airports. 

Until recently, the prevailing advice has been that for anyone impacted by the ban to apply for and obtain their visa at a U.S. Consulate, then fly to a country not on the list, wait there for 14 days, and then enter the U.S. (Of course, entry into the third country depends on that country’s entry and quarantine restrictions.)

HOWEVER….wait for it….

reports have been increasing that certain U.S. consulates are refusing to issue visas to anyone impacted by the ban regardless of whether or not they intend to travel to a third country and wait there for 14 days. Although the travel ban applies only to travel and entry and does NOT prohibit U.S. consulates from issuing visas to artists with valid USCIS approval notices, certain U.S. consulates have taken it upon themselves to go a step further, claiming that they have no way of guaranteeing that the visa holder won’t simply fly directly into the U.S.. Therefore, none shall pass.  

Click here to read a recent article about this in Forbes Magazine

As a result, if an artist has been approved for a U.S. visa, but a U.S. Consulate refuses to issue the visa based on the travel ban, then we recommend the following:

  • Travel to a country that is not on the U.S. travel ban list (such as Canada, Russia, or Barbados) and which has a U.S. Consulate that is open and issuing visas. (This is subject, of course, to that country’s own entry and quarantine restrictions. Many countries have their own strict quarantine and entry restrictions.) 
  • Schedule your visa application appointment for 14 days after you arrive.
  • Document you arrival and your 14-day stay.
  • Once you receive your visa, fly directly to the U.S. (Transit back through a travel-banned country will re-trigger then ban and you will have to start all over again.) 

II. National Interest Waiver Exceptions To The Travel Ban

Assuming an artist subject to the travel ban already has or can find a U.S. consulate willing to issue a visa, they “MAY” be able to obtain a “National Interest Waiver” and be allowed to enter the U.S. without having to quarantine first in a country not on the travel ban list. As you may imagine, the process is vague, convoluted, and labyrinthine, but broadly, there are two options to obtain such a waiver:

1.         Apply for a National Interest Waiver at a U.S. Consulate

Every consulate has its own rules and procedures for how to do this, but, generally:

  • Contact the U.S. Consulate in whichever country you are physically located  no earlier than 30 days prior to the date of travel.
  • Explain that you have an immediate need to travel to the U.S. within 30 days and cannot quarantine in a third country.
  • Provide a letter from your venue, presenter, employer, etc. explaining why it    is critical that you be physically present in the U.S, that your work or performance is essential to them, and that it cannot be done remotely or via  “streaming” outside of the U.S.
  • Agree to quarantine for 14 days after your arrival in the U.S.

You will then need remain while this is pending. If the waiver is granted, you will be sent a letter to present to an immigration officer when entering the U.S.

You will also need to check the website of the specific U.S. Consulate where you intend to apply for specific instructions.

2.         Apply for a National Interest Waiver from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (USCBP)

Under a new procedure recently put in place by the Department of Homeland Insecurity (DHS) that they didn’t both to tell anyone about unless you went looking for it, you can also apply for a National Interest Waiver by contacting one of six airports which have been authorized to issue waivers: Boston, JFK, Miami, Newark, Chicago/O’Hare, Dallas/Fort Worth, LAX. As with applying at a U.S. Consulate, this needs to be done before you travel and the requirements are generally, more or less, somewhat, similar as those listed above for consulates. However, of course, each airport has a different procedure and there is no oversight, so you will need to visa the USCBP website for the specific airport where you intend to apply for specific instructions.

III. RFEs Are Being Issued on Maintaining Status During COVID

On July 31, we sent out an email reporting a two instances where USCIS appeared to be targeting unemployed artists currently in the U.S. and who either already had O-1 classification and were merely seeking a visa extension or who were seeking to change their classification from F-1 to O-1. In each instance, USCIS issued a Request for Evidence asking for proof that the artist has maintained their status by having work or other valid employment between March 2020 and the date of the petition, knowing full well that the entire arts and entertainment industry was unemployed at every level.

We then sent out a new email on August 1, saying we have just learned of another instance.

In what can only be described as a shocking degree of cold-hearted darkness, even for DHS, more such RFEs have continued to be issued. As such, this seems to be yet another obstacle shall have to overcome.

We provided some specific suggestions on how to deal with these RFEs in our June 30 the blog post “USCIS May Be Coming After Unemployed Artists” which you can find on our website. However, in general, when filing petitions on behalf of artists who are currently present in the U.S. and who wish to remain—regardless of whether this is their first O-1 or their third—you MUST include evidence that the artist has been working or performing during the pandemic AND that their future employment requires them to be physically present in the U.S. USCIS is arguing that engagements for performances intended for streaming can be done outside of the U.S. and do not require the artist to be physically present.

IV. Furlough-nado

Did anyone see this coming? For those of you who have may have missed this news amidst the cavalcade of plagues, fires, floods, injustice, riots, fascism, and world collapse that we have come to know as 2020, USCIS plans to furlough 13,500 employees on August 30, 2020 if they do not receive a requested 1.2 billion bailout from Congress. Several U.S. Senators have urged USCIS to postpone these furloughs, not because their care about immigration, but because the most recent projections indicate that USCIS had sufficient revenue to cover all its employees through the end of the current fiscal year and still have an enough balance to start the New Year. Regardless, USCIS claims this is not nearly enough, even with the fee increases that are set to go into effect on October 2, 2020. So, without consensus from Congress on this issue (and that’s less likely than a crawfish whistling the Mozart) and the clock ever ticking, the possibility of furloughs looms ever higher.

Here’s what you need to know:

USCIS does NOT intend to shut down or cease operations! However, furloughs will slow down the processing of applications and cause noticeable delays—particularly since, in recent months, USCIS has been relatively speedy given that petitions in many non-artist related visa categories has come to a grinding halt. Also, there has been no indication that Premium Processing will not continue to be available as an option. Therefore, so long as USCIS remains operational to some degree, then, to avoid premium processing on top of the other fee increases that will go into effect on October 2, consider filing petitions for Spring 2021 engagements sooner rather than later.

And, lastly, I leave you with this…

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit OUR NEW WEBSITE: ggartslaw.com

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty or threatening email to someone, filing a lawsuit, or basically doing anything that may in any way rely upon an assumption that we know what we are talking about.

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Uncategorized, Visas | Comments Closed

USCIS May Be Coming After Unemployed Foreign Artists

Thursday, July 30th, 2020

We have seen two Requests for Evidence (RFE) this week for foreign artists who are currently in the U.S. with O-1 classification (both of whom have been previously approved for O-1 classification multiple times) and who filed new O-1 petitions to extend their status and remain in the U.S. In each case, neither artist has had any engagements since early this year as, like everyone, all of their engagements were cancelled due to Covid-19. In each case, the RFE has asked for proof that the artist has maintained their status by having work or other valid employment between March 2020 and now.

USCIS is taking the position that remaining in the U.S. without work violates their O-1 classification regardless of the reason. While this requirement is technically correct, in my experience (and I am quite old) this rule has never previously been applied to artists as they are not required to have full-time employment in the first place. Regardless, taking this position at this time knowing that the entire performing arts world has been shut down and that many artists cannot logistically or safely leave the U.S. is unconscionable, shameful, callous, immoral, and sinister. (Which, as it happens, spells U.S.C.I.S.) In one instance, USCIS actually took the time to go onto an artist’s website to see that all of the artist’s spring dates were cancelled!  

Whether or not two instances counts as a trend is debatable. However, when it comes to USCIS, I have always taken the position that it only takes one pig to nose its way out of the sty and soon the rest will follow. And, on this particular farm, all of the farmers are too tap-shackled in a bacchanalian orgy of hydroxychloroquine and bleach to notice what their pigs are up to.

So, when preparing O or P petitions for artists who are currently in the U.S. and wish to extend their status and remain, we recommend the following:  

  • Do not list any cancelled dates on an artist’s website.
  • Do not mention in the petition that the artist’s recent U.S. dates were cancelled and have been re-scheduled for 2021. (Yes, one of the aforementioned cases did that.)
  • A petition must provide some type of evidence that the artist has been working during the pandemic. As artists are required to have work authorization regardless of whether or not they were paid, this does not have to include paid engagements. Anything that required the artist to be physically present in the U.S. will work: on-site rehearsals, in-person teaching, or live recordings or streaming with U.S. artists which could not have taken place outside of the U.S. There should also be no gaps longer than 60 days between such engagements.
  • You can use pay-stubs, emails, letters, or anything other than from the artist or the artist’s manager as proof.
  • This will also apply with regard to an artist’s future engagements listed on the petition. As no one knows when anyone will ever get back inside a theater or concert hall, many future engagements are being booked as streamed concerts. Such concerts must require the artist to be physically in the U.S., such as on-site rehearsals, in-person teaching, or live recordings or streaming with U.S. artists which could not have taken place outside of the U.S.
  • Both RFEs have taken issue with the fact that the artist’s future engagements have gaps in excess of 60 days. While there is no formal rule on how much time is allowed between engagements, in practice we have never seen USCIS baulk at anything less than 90 days. They seem now to have defaulted to 60 days.  

While there has been no formal announcement regarding new policies, USCIS did formally clarify last month its longstanding policy that USCIS examiners have broad interpretive discretion to determine whether or not a petitioner has satisfied the requirements for a visa petition to be approved—which usually involves the examiner consulting with the gods of their reptilian forbears. As only a few weeks ago, the White Pride Piper attempted to kick out foreign students altogether for taking on-line classes, I am not surprised to see yet another effort to cull anyone they feel should not be here unemployed.

And I still don’t know when U.S. Consulates will start issuing visas again or how long the travel bans on citizens from certain countries being able to enter the U.S. will remain in place…although I cannot fathom why anyone would want to come here at the moment anyway.    

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit OUR BRAND NEW WEBSITE: ggartslaw.com

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty or threatening email to someone, filing a lawsuit, or basically doing anything that may in any way rely upon an assumption that we know what we are talking about.

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Visas | Comments Closed

Visa Tip for Booking Agents/Managers

Friday, December 13th, 2019

December 13, 2019

Hi folks

Sorry for our infrequent posts. We’ll try and do better. To that end, I thought I’d share an issue that just arose with one of our clients.

A booking agent filed P-1/P-1S visa petitions for a group that has previously been approved. This time, they received an RFE on a single issue: USCIS is asking for proof that the agent is, in fact, has been authorized to act as the petitioner on behalf of the group and its employers.

While some of you may or may not be aware of this issue, and I’d love to blame this on the Screaming Carrot Demon, its actual an issue that has been around for years—though Trump has certainly made it worse. The problem arises from the different ways USCIS examiners interpret the USCIS regulations pertaining to when someone other than a person’s direct employer can file a visa petition on someone else’s behalf.

As a result we have long recommended that any time a booking agent is serving as a petitioner for a group or artist, the visa petition should include two things:

1) An agent appointment authorization from the artist/group acknowledging that the agent has been appointed to serve as the petitioner. This can be on a single sheet of paper that says:
I/we authorize [NAME OF PETITIONER] to act as my/our agent for the limited purpose of filing an immigration petition to enable me/us to obtain a work-related U.S. visa classification so that I/we may work/perform in the U.S. as well as to accept service of process in the U.S. on my/our behalf. [NAME OF ARTIST/GROUP][SIGNATURE]; and

2) An agent appointment authorization from EACH presenter/employer of the group acknowledging that they, too, have each appointed the agent to be the petitioner. This, too, need only be a single sheet of paper which says: I/we have engaged the services of [NAME OF ARTIST/GROUP] to perform in the U.S., and authorize [NAME OF PETITIONER] to act for and in our place as agent for the limited purpose of filing an immigration petition to obtain the necessary U.S. work-related visa classification for said artist as well as to accept service of process in the U.S. on our behalf. [NAME OF PRESENTER/VENUE][SIGNATURE]

Do NOT merely include this language within a booking contract or management agreement as, in our experience, USCIS will never find it. Always use separate paper.

Is this a pain in the ass? Yes. However, we do this for ALL of the petitions we file and rarely encounter any difficulties with getting presenters/venues to comply. They already know the system is messed up.

Wishing everyone a wonderful Christmas, Yule, Hanukkah, and all other observances or lack thereof…drink up, as there are lots of potential USCIS changes ahead for the New Year.

__________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com
__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

 

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Agents, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Visas | Comments Closed

Plan On It!

Wednesday, October 1st, 2014

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.    

We booked a tour for a folk/rock group that will be touring the US for the first time. It took a lot longer to get their visas approved because US Immigration kept asking for unreasonable things like background information on venues and festivals and even made us get actual copies of press. They also made us pay a fee to a union even though the artists are not union members. Now, the consulate is refusing to accommodate the group’s travel schedule. Because the group is on tour before coming to the US, there are only 1 or 2 days that will work for them to go to a US consulate and they will need to get the visas back the same day or the next day at the latest. We have already booked all of the flights and those cannot be changed without great cost. Its probably too late now, but, for the future, is there a way we can request a specific date and get the visas back the same day? How do we avoid all of this delay and scrambling in the future?  

Unless you just arrived to our fair planet, then you probably know that the process for obtaining visas for foreign artists to perform in the United States has been significantly compromised for the last nine months or so. While there have been some minor improvements in some areas, the process has continued to be mired down with narrower interpretations of old regulations, frustrating Requests for Addition Evidence (RFEs), and stricter scrutiny. So you should expect delays and plan for them. If a visa petition was simple last year, expect it to be more time consuming this year…even if its for the same artist and group.

While both United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the United States Department of State’s Consulates (which, for the record, are two different agencies) will make accommodation for emergencies, they are loathe to do so…and the emergencies have to be actual emergencies and not just scheduling or planning conflicts. This means, it needs to involve a last minute cancelation, medical emergency, Act of God, or other severe hardship which could not have otherwise been avoided by advanced planning. Otherwise, the process does not accommodate. You must accommodate the process. You simply cannot count on either USCIS or the US Consulates to accommodate an artist’s tight schedule or limited range of availability.

Your best strategy is to make a realistic assessment of the entire visa process before booking a tour or engaging an artist in the first place. While this may sound obvious, its surprising how often we see the very opposite in practice. There is a presumption that if you book or engage an artist, then all of the other logistics will magically sort themselves out. For example, at a recent arts conference, a manager made an appointment for a free consultation. Their question was that they had just taken on a number of young, non-US artists onto their roster, had already booked a number of US engagements for them at that same conference and wanted to know how hard it will be to get visas for them to perform in the US. That’s a great question, but one which should have been addressed before the manager accepted the artists onto their roster in the first place.

Too often, we see a similar scenario in large presenting organizations where the artistic planning department seems to believe that it is their job to dream big and someone’s else’s job to make sure everyone shows up. I have seen entire festivals planned, with artists engaged and travel plans made, before anyone turned to the issue of visas or other more mundane matters. The truth is that both halves need to work together…and at the same time.

Without question, the US visa process is frustrating, illogical, impractical, absurd, arbitrary, unpredictable, and expensive. What it is not is flexible. For managers and agents, its not just about signing artists that you know you can get booked. For presenters, its not just about planning performances that will sell tickets and enthrall audiences. The artists actually need to show up. That means taking into consideration, at the outset, such issues as: have there been any changes or new requirements since the last time you or the artist obtained a visa? Does the artist or group have the necessary background materials and supporting evidence required for a visa petition? Who will be in charge of the process? What are the costs and who will pay for them? What is the timeline?

Its also not enough just to turn the process over to someone else. There have been many instances where we have been brought into help obtain a visa for an artist or group who has been booked to perform in the US, only to discover that no one has bothered to advise the artist or group of the process or the considerable amount of paperwork and documentation they will need to provide. This almost always causes considerable delay and extra costs. You simply cannot book a foreign artist and ask questions later.

__________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and otherGG_logo_for-facebook legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.

All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agents, Artist Management, Arts Management, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Touring, Visas | Comments Closed

Welcome To The New Visa Reality!

Thursday, July 24th, 2014

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.

Dear Law and Disorder:

We filed visa petitions for O-1 and an O-2 visas. USCIS is asking for a contract between each of the O-2s and either the petitioner or the employers. This has never been an issue before and we’ve been doing this for 20 years. They are also asking for a union consult letter for one of the O-2s whose title is “Movement Coach.” We got a consult from IATSE for the others, but IATSE doesn’t cover this. USCIS is suggesting that we get a consult from AGMA. Do we have to do that? Can we use a letter from a peer organization like TCG or APAP instead?

Thanks for giving me an excuse to rant about USCIS and the new challenges of obtaining visas for artists who wish to perform and tour in the U.S. I haven’t done that for almost a month now.

Both the Vermont and California Service Centers continue to shoot back frustrating Requests for Evidence (RFEs) and to scrutinize petitions like never before. They appear to be paying special attention to O-2, P-1S, and P-3S petitions for support staff. It has now become de rigueur for USCIS to require that employment terms for each member of the support staff be specified, including who is paying them and how much they are being paid. They are also asking for resumes for each person and a specific statement of why each person is necessary and critical to the performance or concert.

You can also expect new troubles with P-3 petitions for culturally unique artists and groups. While P-3 petitions have always had their own complexities, both service centers are now reiterating that an artist or group cannot be culturally unique and also perform anything that is “contemporary” or “modern.” One RFE I saw stated that: “The contents and themes of a particular form of art may also contain elements and influences of a given culture, and yet still not meet the definition of “culturally unique.” Also, simply because a form of art may be unique, it does not necessarily follow that it meets die regulatory definition of “culturally unique.” Another USCIS examiner recently wrote:

It is not enough for the author of a testimonial letter to simply state that the beneficiaries have cultural, artistic, and/or culturally unique skills. The testimonials should be detailed and specific in describing what the beneficiaries’ skills are; how the beneficiaries obtained those skills; how and why those skills are associated with a “culturally unique” art form; and what the defining aspects of the beneficiaries’ particular art form are that make it “culturally unique” as opposed to other forms of the creative activity or endeavor. Furthermore, it is not sufficient to simply state that an artist represents his or her culture.

Speaking of testimonial letters, I am continuing to see USCIS request “independent evidence” establishing that each expert is, in fact, a “recognized expert.” Whether or not this means that the experts must now have experts, simply attaching the expert’s resume is no longer sufficient. USCIS is continuing to ask for articles and websites verifying each expert’s credentials.

In addition to targeting P-3 petitions and petitions for support staff in all categories, USCIS also appears to be focusing the all-seeing eye of Sauron on young artists, particular recent graduates who may still be in F-1 status. Any appearance of the words “young” or “rising” or “up and coming” will bring a certain RFE. You also need to focus on the “professional” work of the artist and put as much distance as you can between the artist and any school or training experience.

As for union consultations, letters from peer groups and service organizations have never been an alternative where a union covers the specific job title. However, while USCIS may have let this slip in the past, this is no longer the case. If they even smell the applicability of a union, then you must provide evidence of a union consultation (which could include a union objection. Remember, the unions do NOT have to approve any petition. They only have the right to be “consulted.”) In your case, USCIS is correct: AGMA is the appropriate union for a “Movement Coach.”

USCIS is also being remarkably inconsistent in processing times, as well. Just this week, I received an approval notice from the California Service Center three days after the petition was filed—and without premium processing! I’m not complaining, but the same service center took over three months to adjudicate a petition I filed in April. More recently, the Vermont Service Center approved a P-1 petition in two weeks, but lost the accompanying P-1S petition I had filed at the same time. This only serves to make an already unpredictable process even more unpredictable. The only thing I can say with certainty is that the “official” reported processing times that you will find posted on the USCIS webpage are about as reliable as a cheesecloth condom!

The best you can do at this point is exhaustively document your petitions, allow lots of extra time, plan for the worst, anticipate USCIS stupidity, and, with any luck and few talismans, be pleasantly surprised. In short, whatever you did in the past, all that changed after January 2014. Welcome to the new visa reality!

__________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other GG_logo_for-facebooklegal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.

All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Artist Management, Arts Management, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Touring, Visas | Comments Closed

The Invasion of the Visa Examiner Body Snatchers Continues! (aka “The Day The Visa Process Stood Still”)

Thursday, May 8th, 2014

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

Dear Law and Disorder:

I recently received an RFE for a group touring the US this summer. The group is represented by a European manager who books their dates, but our US management company has previously filed petitions for them in the past, all of which have been approved without a problem. The RFE claims that I need to prove that we are not only the agent for the artists, but for each of venues on their tour. I provided an itinerary, a letter of agreement between us and the group where we are agreeing to serve as their US representatives, as well as engagement contracts confirming all the dates, including fees. This is what I have always given them before. What do they want?

For those of you who have been lucky enough not to be following along, about four months ago, the US government agency that reviews and approves visa petitions for artists, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), was invaded by aliens…and, by that, I do not mean non-US citizens, but something non-human. It began at the USCIS Vermont Service Center where reports indicate that in early February 2014 the bodies of several unsuspecting USCIS visa examiners spontaneously exploded into a burst of tentacles, multiple glowing eyes, and gaping orifices of dripping fangs. Shortly thereafter, their seedlings were able to infiltrate deliveries of pico de gallo sent to the USCIS California Service Center where they quickly replicated themselves, consuming the bodies of helpless visa examiners there as well. Ever since, these insidious creatures have taken over the review of O and P petitions, resulting in flurry of spurious RFE’s or Requests for Evidence (ie: prove that Lincoln Center is a distinguished venue!) and re-imagined interpretations of regulatory language and requirements (ie: for a role in a production to constitute a “lead or starring role” it must also be performed by an artist whose name alone will demonstrably increase ticket sales!)

Whether these beings are the evil spawn of a far-away galaxy offended by interpretive dance or whether they come from a death star of Blue Meanies, we don’t know. What we do know is that, among other things, USCIS has been seriously scrutinizing petitions filed by agents and managers, as well as itineraries. On a recent national conference call with USCIS representatives, there was a considerable amount of talk about concerns over “speculative” employment and making sure that artists had “confirmed engagements” and were not merely asking for visas in anticipation of future work.

As a result, agents and managers are being asked with greater frequency to provide proof of the agency relationship, including proof that they are authorized to represent both the artist as well as the presenters/venues. This can be either a written (and signed) agency or management agreement with the artists or a letter or other statement signed by the artist confirming that the artist has “appointed” the agent or manager to represent them in the United States. If the agent/manager has also booked all of the engagements (ie: the agent/manager’s name appears on each of the contracts or engagement confirmations), then such a letter of appointment appears to be appeasing the visa beasts…at least for now. However, many times either the artist has booked their own engagements directly with the presenter/venue or the engagements have been booked by a non-US agency and the US agent or manager is merely serving as the petitioner for purposes of filing the visa petition. In such cases, which appears to be your situation, USCIS is asking for proof that the US petitioner has been authorized to file the petition by the artist (or the artist’s non-US agent) as well as by the artist’s non-US agent and, in some cases, by each of the presenters/venues on the artist’s itinerary.

Based on a strict regulatory analysis, I cannot say that this is inappropriate. Rather, its just a very literal reading of certain regulations which have never been strictly enforced until now. Regardless, unless you have booked each of the artist’s engagements yourself, if there are any engagements booked directly between the artist and the venue/presenter, then you also need to include an “appointment form” from those presenters/venues authorizing you to include their engagement on the petition. If the artist has a non-US agent or manager, then you will need (1) proof of the relationship between the artist and the non-US agent and (2) proof that you have been authorized by the non-US agent to file the petition for the artist and on behalf of the engagements booked by the non-US agent. If there are any engagements booked directly by the artists, you will also need proof from the presenter/venue that you are authorized to include their date on your petition. The good news, such as it is, is that such “appointment form” does not need to be anything more elaborate that: “I have engaged [Artist] to perform for me. I hereby appoint [Petitioner] to include this engagement on the visa petition.” That’s it.

We’ve actually been doing this for a while. Whenever our management division acts as petitioner, we include appointment forms from everyone—our theory being: the more paperwork we throw into a petition, the more there’s bound to be something in there a US examiner is looking far. We apply this same theory to reviews, programs, and all other evidence as well. So far, this has worked.

As I mentioned, I have participated on several recent national conference calls with USCIS officials and, on each occasion, they have declared no knowledge of any new practices, rules, requirements, or regulatory interpretations designed to frustrate or scrutinize the O and P visa process. Instead, they claim to have helpfully appointed a panel of “performing arts experts”—three, to be exact, who, near as I can tell, have little, if any, actual practical familiarity with what we do—to help come up with suggestions to solve problems they claim do not exist. In other words, to translate this into government-speak:

There is no problem, but if there is a problem, we have appointed a panel of experts unfamiliar with the problem to help come up with solutions to address the non-existent problem which doesn’t need addressing, because there is no problem, but we promise we will make it better by focusing on fixing things that were not broken in the first place…until they were broken…but not by us.  

On second thought, perhaps these invaders aren’t from another planet after all.

_________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and otherGG_logo_for-facebook legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.

All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

 

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agents, Artist Management, Arts Management, Contracts, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Touring, Visas | Comments Closed

Can I Re-Use an Old Union Consult Letter for a Visa Petition?

Wednesday, December 12th, 2012

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.

Dear Law and Disorder:

Last year I filed a P-1 petition for a group. I obtained a consult letter from AFM. When I filed a petition for their 2013 tour, the USCIS said I needed to get a new consult letter. I thought that union opinion letters are good for 3 years? Did that rule change?

No, nothing’s changed. There’s just a bit of confusion, that’s all. Union consultations for O-1B petitions are good for 2 years provided the artist is performing within 2 years of the date of the original union consultation letter. If that’s the case, then you don’t need to get a new one. However, this has never been the rule with P-1 petitions or any other category: O-2, P-1S, etc.

So, if you obtained an O-1B for an opera singer and you have an AGMA consult letter dated October 1, 2012, then that same consult letter can be used for subsequent O-1B petitions for the singer’s subsequent engagements through October 1, 2014. You just need to be able to provide a copy of the prior consultation letter. Even if the original consult letter was written for a different petitioner, you can still use it. It’s the identity of the artist that counts. However, if you obtained a P-1 for a group and you have an AFM consult letter dated October 1, 2012, then any and all new petitions will require new consult letters.

In your case, I assume you received a Request for Evidence (RFE) from USCIS. You just need to get a new consultation letter from AFM and attach it to your RFE response. That should do the trick.

________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.

All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Artist Management, Arts Management, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Touring, Visas | Comments Closed