What are the opening hours?

Monday 9am - 6pm Tuesday 9am - 6pm Wednesday 9am - 6pm Thursday 9am - 6pm Friday 9am - 6pm

https://arvian-immigration.com/

Arvian Immigration Law Firm, 300 Spectrum Center Drive, Floor 4, Los Angeles, CA (2026)

10/15/2026

🇺🇸 Court orders the State Department to hold the DV-2027 Green Card lottery.

On October 14, U.S. District Judge Jinsook Ohta granted Red Eagle Law’s request in its lawsuit against Marco Rubio and ordered the State Department to open registration for the DV-2027 lottery.

🔹 The court ordered the State Department to publicly announce the registration dates, the official application website, and the eligibility requirements. The information must also be distributed through all department channels, including the Federal Register.

🔹 The application period must remain open for at least 30 days. Once registration closes, the State Department must conduct the selection process and notify the winners.

Initially, the court set deadlines requiring the department to announce registration by October 15, open registration by October 18, and notify winners by November 19. However, after the ruling, both parties jointly requested additional time to organize the application process.

⚠️ The court granted the request and extended the deadlines by two weeks. The State Department must now announce the registration dates and requirements by October 29, open registration by November 1, and notify winners by December 3, 2026.

Red Eagle Law attorney Curtis Morrison said he agreed to the extension to give the Kentucky Consular Center time to prepare the registration system and avoid technical problems at launch.

The ruling is a preliminary injunction, and the court retained the authority to monitor compliance or modify its terms.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

10/13/2026

🇺🇸 BIA bars asylum for citizens of EU and other developed countries, with limited exceptions.

On October 9, the BIA issued a precedential decision, Matter of B-S-A-N-, requiring immigration judges to deny asylum to citizens of developed democracies that protect human rights.

🔹 The restrictions cover all European Union member states, as well as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Andorra, and San Marino.

🔹 Exceptions are available in extraordinary circumstances involving national security or foreign policy. The BIA also authorized judges to deny these applications at a preliminary hearing, without a full hearing on the merits.

The BIA extended this ruling to withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), noting that these forms of relief require applicants to meet a higher standard of proof regarding the likelihood of harm.

🔹 In the case at issue, the applicant was a citizen of both France and Gabon. She claimed that Gabonese authorities threatened her because of her family’s political views and could track her down in France. The BIA found insufficient evidence that she faced a threat in France and upheld the denial of her application.

⚠️ If an EU citizen establishes a risk of persecution in their country of citizenship, the BIA will require them to explain why they cannot safely live in any of the EU’s other 26 member states.

The restrictions will also affect applicants with dual EU citizenship, even if they live in another country and seek asylum based on persecution there. However, the rule for EU citizens does not apply to people who hold a European residence permit or temporary protection status but are not EU citizens.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

10/09/2026

🇺🇸 Federal court has barred ICE from detaining immigrants at immigration courts nationwide.

On September 30, U.S. District Judge Peter Castel ruled that the Trump administration’s policy expanding ICE’s authority to detain people inside and near immigration courts was unlawful. The ruling reinstates the 2021 guidelines and applies nationwide.

🔹 ICE had been detaining people who showed up for hearings in their immigration cases. The lawsuit also challenged the practice of dismissing cases based on DHS’s oral motions without giving individuals an opportunity to submit a written response. Once a case was dismissed, the person could be detained immediately and placed in expedited removal proceedings.
🔹 The administration justified these arrests by relying on 2025 memoranda that revoked the previous restrictions. During the litigation, the government acknowledged that these memoranda did not apply to immigration courts, despite previously arguing otherwise.
🔹 The court found that ICE had failed to provide sufficient justification for abandoning the previous restrictions and struck down the 2025 policy provisions the agency had relied on to detain people at immigration courts.

The administration asked the court to limit the ruling to the parties involved in the lawsuit. The court rejected that argument and vacated the unlawful policy provisions.

⚠️ Detentions at immigration courts may still occur in exceptional circumstances. The 2021 guidelines provide exceptions when there is a national security threat, a risk of death or violence, or a threat that evidence in a criminal case may be destroyed.
The guidelines also allow detention of someone who poses a threat to public safety if no safe alternative detention location is available or arranging detention there would be too difficult.

👉 The practice of dismissing cases without proper procedural safeguards had already been discontinued by EOIR following court intervention. The court therefore dismissed that part of the lawsuit. The new ruling definitively vacates the challenged provisions of ICE’s policy on detentions at immigration courts.

10/07/2026

🇺🇸 Court orders the State Department to continue processing DV-2026 cases after September 30.

On September 30, Judge Edward Davila ordered the Department of State to continue processing DV-2026 applications for an additional 10 days after the end of the fiscal year. The order was issued in Medani v. Trump due to delays in implementing the court’s previous order.

Previously, on August 28, the court suspended three policies that had blocked the processing of I-485 applications by USCIS, the issuance of Diversity Visas at U.S. consulates, and the issuance of immigrant visas to nationals of 75 countries.

🔹 The Department of State was required to resume processing applications and reconsider denials issued solely because of these suspensions. However, the agency waited 10 days before sending consulates instructions on how to implement the order.

🔹 Processing was then further delayed by training staff on the new Public Charge rules. Consulates that had not completed the training could not resume visa processing. The court found that the State Department did not timely notify the court about this obstacle.

The court found that the August order had not been adequately implemented and determined that the delays had significantly reduced the time remaining for applicants to obtain their visas. The additional 10 days are intended to compensate for the delay in sending instructions to consulates.

👉 The Department of State must make all reasonable and practically possible efforts in good faith to continue processing pending DV-2026 cases and reconsider denials based on the suspension of DV processing or visa issuance to nationals of the 75 countries.

The protection applies to applicants who are members of the court-approved classes, not just those specifically named in the lawsuit. The new order is directed at the Department of State and does not provide additional time for USCIS to process I-485 applications.

⚠️ The court did not guarantee visa issuance to all applicants and declined to reserve all unused DV-2026 visas.

The Department of State must report every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday until the additional period ends.

10/02/2026

🇺🇸 The October Visa Bulletin has been released with important changes in the family-based and employment-based categories.

The Department of State published the October 2026 Visa Bulletin on September 29, just two days before the start of the new fiscal year. The agency did not explain the reason for the delay.

❗️ October 1 marks the beginning of the new fiscal year in the U.S., when new annual immigrant visa numbers become available.

🔹 For F2A, the category for spouses and unmarried children under 21 of U.S. permanent residents, the filing category is fully open. If you meet the requirements for Adjustment of Status, you can file Form I-485 regardless of your priority date;

🔹 For EB-1, the category remains current. If you meet the requirements for AOS, you can file Form I-140 together with your I-485;

🔹 For EB-2, including EB-2 NIW, applicants with a priority date earlier than March 15, 2026, will be able to file an I-485 in October;

🔹 For EB-3 skilled workers and professionals, the filing date is August 1, 2024, while for other workers, it is June 1, 2022.

Dates for Filing determine when you can file your application. Final Action Dates determine when your Green Card can be finally approved or an immigrant visa can be issued.

⚠️ In October, USCIS has authorized the use of the Dates for Filing chart, so applicants filing an I-485 from within the U.S. should use this chart. Final approval will depend on visa availability under the Final Action Dates chart.

If you are in the U.S. and want to evaluate your chances of obtaining an EB-1 or EB-2 visa, contact us. We offer a free case evaluation.

09/30/2026

🇺🇸 Can you use money earned in the U.S. to make an E-2 visa investment?

We are often asked whether money earned in the U.S. can be used for an E-2 investment and shown as the initial investment in a business.

👉 Yes, it can, as long as the funds were obtained lawfully and you can document their source. For an E-2 visa, the source of the investment does not have to be outside the U.S.

Income earned in the U.S. can be documented with tax returns, W-2s or 1099s, bank statements, pay stubs, and other documents showing where the money came from and that it belongs to the investor.

✅ The funds must then actually be invested in the business and placed at commercial risk. Money simply sitting in a bank account and not yet committed to launching or purchasing the business does not qualify as an E-2 investment.

For an E-2 visa, you also need to show that:
🔹 the applicant is a national of a country that has a treaty with the U.S.;
🔹 the investment has already been made or is in the process of being made and is substantial in relation to the specific business;
🔹 the applicant has control of the company and will direct and develop the business;
🔹 the business is not a marginal enterprise, meaning it must have the ability to generate more than just enough income to support the investor and their family, or have the capacity to make a significant economic contribution;
🔹 the applicant’s presence in the U.S. is connected to directing and developing the business.

Lawfully earned money in the U.S. can be used for an E-2 investment if you can document its source, properly make the investment, and meet the other E-2 visa requirements.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

09/24/2026

🇺🇸 Appeals court limits deportations of immigrants to third countries.

On September 18, the First Circuit upheld a decision in D.V.D. v. DHS, finding unlawful a process for quickly deporting people to countries that were not identified in their removal orders or during prior proceedings.

🔹 DHS policy allowed a person with a final removal order to be sent to another country. If the State Department determined that the country had provided sufficient diplomatic assurances that the person would not be persecuted or tortured, DHS could carry out the removal without an additional process allowing the person to raise a fear of persecution or torture.

🔹 If no such assurances were available, ICE provided notice of removal approximately 24 hours in advance. The court found that this did not provide a meaningful opportunity to protect the person’s rights.

🔹 Before removing someone to a third country, DHS must tell the person where they are being sent and provide a meaningful opportunity to raise a claim that they face persecution or torture in that country.

The court’s decision applies to people with final removal orders, including those who were previously granted withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture with respect to a specific country.

👉 On September 21, The Deportation Project published the results of an investigation into this practice and reported that since 2025, the administration has entered into agreements with 35 countries allowing people to be deported there even though they are not citizens of those countries and may have no connection to them.

At least $410 million was allocated for these agreements and related programs. According to data collected by the journalists, 25,447 people had already been sent to third countries as of August 31, 2026.

09/22/2026

🇺🇸 BIA allows DHS to use other asylum applicants’ declarations to evaluate your credibility.

The BIA issued a new precedent decision, Matter of V-S-A-, expanding DHS’s ability to use declarations from other asylum cases when evaluating the credibility of a specific applicant’s claim.

🔹 In the case, the applicant was granted asylum by an Immigration Judge. DHS appealed the decision and submitted 12 declarations from other cases, arguing that they contained substantial similarities to the applicant’s story, including similar wording, structure, and factual details.

🔹 The names and other personally identifying information in those declarations were redacted. The Immigration Judge declined to give the documents significant weight because of privacy concerns and because the applicant had no opportunity to cross-examine the people who had submitted the declarations. The judge ultimately found the applicant credible and granted asylum.

🔹 The BIA reversed that decision and held that redacting personally identifying information is sufficient to protect the privacy of other asylum applicants. DHS may use such documents to compare the language and circumstances of different cases.

The people whose declarations are used for comparison do not have to appear in Immigration Court for cross-examination because their declarations are not being used to prove that the events described actually happened. They are being used to identify similarities between different declarations.

⚠️ Similar wording in asylum declarations does not automatically result in a denial or mean that the applicant’s story is fabricated. The applicant must be given meaningful notice of the similarities and a reasonable opportunity to explain them, and the Immigration Judge must consider the totality of the circumstances.

Even genuine stories can raise additional questions if the wording, sequence of events, or details are too similar to declarations submitted by other applicants.

👉 An Immigration Judge can no longer exclude these materials simply because the identities of the other applicants have been redacted or because those applicants cannot be called to court for cross-examination.

09/18/2026

⚡️ 22 states and Washington, D.C. have sued over the new Public Charge rules.

On September 14, a coalition of 22 states and Washington, D.C. filed a federal lawsuit challenging the new Public Charge rules, which are scheduled to take effect on September 18, 2026.

⚠️ The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare the new DHS policy unlawful and block its implementation. They argue that the agency has given immigration officers too much discretion to consider the use of public benefits when reviewing Green Card applications.

Starting September 18, USCIS will be able to consider Medicaid, SNAP, housing, food, and other assistance for which eligibility depends on an applicant’s income or financial circumstances. Receiving these benefits may become one of the factors considered in a Green Card denial.

The states argue that the new rule exceeds DHS’s authority, violates federal administrative law, and does not provide sufficiently clear limits on immigration officers’ discretion.

❗️ A separate lawsuit challenging the same rules was also filed by New York City, Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, Santa Clara County, and King County. Local officials argue that the new policy could cause families to forgo healthcare, food assistance, and other benefits because of concerns about their future Green Card eligibility.

As of publication, the court had not issued a preliminary injunction or otherwise paused the new rules while the lawsuits are pending. The effective date remains September 18.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

09/15/2026

🇺🇸 There are only a few days left before the new Public Charge rules take effect. They will take effect on September 18, 2026, and will apply to I-485 applications filed by mail or online on or after that date.

After September 18, officers will consider the receipt of Medicaid and Medi-Cal, SNAP, housing assistance, financial aid for education, and other programs for which eligibility depends on income or financial circumstances.

❗️ If you are planning to file an I-485, check which benefits you are currently receiving. If you are able to stop receiving Medicaid/Medi-Cal, SNAP, or other benefits, try to do so before September 18 and keep proof that your benefits were terminated or that you contacted the appropriate agency.

Benefits received before September 18 will be evaluated under the old rules. Under those rules, USCIS considers cash assistance and long-term institutionalization at government expense.

⚠️ Receiving Medicaid, SNAP, or another covered benefit after September 18 could become a reason for a Green Card denial. The officer will consider factors including your age, health, family status, income, assets, education, skills, the length of time you received benefits, the amount of assistance received, and more.

If you are already eligible to file an I-485 and your application package is complete, you should make every effort to file before September 18. These applications will continue to be evaluated under the old Public Charge rules.

Benefits received by a spouse, children, or other family members are not considered benefits received by the applicant. Asylees, refugees, VAWA applicants, and T/U and SIJ applicants are exempt from the Public Charge test.

✅ If you stop receiving benefits, keep the termination letter, electronic confirmation, termination request, or other documentation that you can provide to USCIS if necessary.

📩 If you’re currently in the U.S., you can contact us directly for a free consultation. Send us a DM to schedule your appointment.

Arvian Immigration Law Firm

10/15/2026

10/13/2026

10/09/2026

10/07/2026

10/02/2026

09/30/2026

09/24/2026

09/22/2026

09/18/2026

09/15/2026

Address

Opening Hours

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share

Category

Listing takedown request

Monday	9am - 6pm
Tuesday	9am - 6pm
Wednesday	9am - 6pm
Thursday	9am - 6pm
Friday	9am - 6pm