How to Run a Successful Immigration Practice During COVID-19
Just as immigration lawyers around the country started getting the hang of the ever-changing immigration policies and politics, such as navigating…
March 25, 2020 at 10:28 PM
6 minute read
Just as immigration lawyers around the country started getting the hang of the ever-changing immigration policies and politics, such as navigating around the border wall debate, wildly increased Request for Evidence (RFE), higher denial rates of nonimmigrant petitions with minimal reasoning in the denial decisions, and becoming experts at explaining the unexplainable to clients, we are now facing the new reality of virus-related office quarantines, testing our adaptability in a new way.
While many sectors of the legal field have long become amenable to working remotely, immigration practitioners are limited in their abilities to do so, simply because the government still requires the majority of immigration proceedings be filed in hard-copy format. Add to that the reality of multiple forms and supporting documents required to be submitted in duplicate, with hard copy filing fee checks and the resulting need for courier or Express Mail services, and the picture of a paper-heavy practice with substantial administrative support needs — when run on significant scale — comes to light.
So, what's an immigration practitioner to do in times of COVID-19 social distancing, firm and client quarantines, and resulting limited access to physical offices? The following discussion and suggestions are based on business immigration experience and may have limited applicability to family immigration practitioners and immigration litigators, but, hopefully, our lessons learned to date will be of some help to a wide range of affected legal professionals in the immigration field and beyond.
Prioritization: In the uncertainty of office closures and limited access to facilities, the first order of the day is prioritization. Immigration Bar colleagues would agree that the latter is hard to accomplish, even on a relatively uneventful day in the office, and most of us are in the habit of "shooting from the hip." The current conditions of life and practice necessitate careful planning and prioritization. As conscientious lawyers, we, of course, prefer to make a routine extension of stay filings for our client's employees several months in advance of the status expiration dates. But, under the current circumstances, we may need to make an urgent filing for an essential health care employee first and ahead of a routine submission. Prioritizing cases in writing helps visualize goals and makes it easy to share with office team members working remotely.
Client Communication: We work with clients closely and keep them updated on their cases on a regular basis, and this is particularly important today, especially if your prioritization efforts and limited access to office premises push their non-urgent projects for a later time. Most of our clients are operating under the same constraints we have unexpectedly found ourselves under, and many are in even worse predicaments due to the nature of their businesses. Discussing their needs and priorities is key before making your work plans final. While we cannot assume everybody will always be onboard with our plans and priorities, most clients (both businesses and individuals) are understanding and flexible, but only if the "cards are on the table." Setting realistic expectations and not overpromising is key for the relationships and mutual trust preservation through these challenging times.
Team Organization: While most lawyers habitually perform at least some work remotely, some of the staff members (paralegals, legal assistants, and secretaries, among others) have not had to do this on a regular basis, or at all (note to self: practice team's work from home post-COVID to ensure everybody's skills sharpened by the ongoing crisis do not go dormant), so clear instructions, advance planning, and communication becomes particularly important. When having entire legal teams work offsite, be sure to appoint a colleague to run tally of all files taken off premises. Remind everyone of the importance of keeping files and client data confidential and ensuring data safety. Ensure availability of the necessary technology and — most importantly — reliable communication among the team via e-mail and Zoom, or other conferencing means. While texting for business is not advisable as a matter of regular practice, as records of these communications are harder to maintain, making texting available as means to quickly catch attention is worthwhile (note to self: do not get carried away with texting – nobody wants to develop a fear of mobile phones while under quarantine!).
Technology: While it is hard to find a "silver lining" in this crisis, one take away pertains to sharpening one's technical skills. As many attorneys (including this writer) tend to be low tech and proud of it, present experience shows that mastering our information technology capacities is a worthy pursuit. At times like these, the number of "help" requests to firm IT departments, if one's firm is fortunate to have one, increases exponentially. And many of our requests are of the nature that would make most of us blush if recited back in "the time of peace." With this in mind, learning more about the capabilities of our portable technology and certain email and phone functions beyond the basics we use most often is advisable. Those of us who practice in a firm may want to expand home-office technology to include a reliable printer, scanner, and copier, since a computer alone may or may not satisfy all work-from-home needs.
Adaptability: Last, but not least, as legal professionals, we are a high-strung bunch that counts on being in control of our environment. As the present situation proves, this isn't always possible, and coming to terms with limitations may well be one of the biggest lessons learned. However, the lesson is not to give up, but to figure out what we can do and do it to the best of our ability.
Irina Plumlee is a shareholder at Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr and head of the firm's Immigration practice. Irina represents clients in a variety of immigration matters, including international executive and managerial personnel transfers; e-proceedings for international entrepreneurs; H-1B, TN and L-1 petition proceedings for foreign executives and managers, IT specialists, doctors and professional workers in major industries; and employment and family-based permanent immigration proceedings.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readOvertime Rewind: Texas Court Ruling Unravels FLSA Salary Level Increases
4 minute readTrump, ABC News Settle Defamation Lawsuit Before Depositions
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250