Ripple Effect of Findream on Foreign Students

On June 26, 2020, the owner of Findream LLC and Sinocontech LLC, Weiyun "Kelly" Huang, was sentenced to 37 months in federal prison for conspiracy to commit visa fraud. These two companies provided bogus employment verification records for foreign students to extend their stay in the U.S. on F-1 and H-1B status. ICE reported that there were at least 2,686 international students involved in this matter.

Enter your email address:

The sentencing of Kelly Huang is not the end of the story. It has created a ripple effect on all foreign nationals that have ever received an offer letter and/or employment verification document from Findream or Sinocontech for the purpose of bridging their OPT or STEM OPT unemployment period. 

These foreign nationals, many in F-1 or H-1B status, are also worried about whether any further actions will be taken by the DHS. As of now, there is no indication that DHS will be rounding up  these non-immigrant visa holders as they did in the UNNJ (University of North New Jersey) operation. Still, the Findream/Sinocontech issue has surfaced on a few different occasions, showing that it is not going away any time soon. 

The most common situation is the Request For Evidence (RFE). Foreign nationals who have a connection with these two sham companies have been cornered by RFEs during their change of status, H-1B extension/transfer, or even adjustment of status applications. These RFEs focus on the applicant's failure to maintain his/her status. Some of them even bring up the issue of misrepresentation. If an applicant has ever procured immigration benefits by misrepresentation, he/she is subject to a ground of admissibility. Their ability to enter the U.S. or apply for a Green Card will be impaired. Applicants in the U.S. may even be placed in removal proceedings.

There are also reports of Chinese students that were sponsored by Findream for OPT employment being stopped and removed by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers upon their return from overseas travel. Some students or workers do not even make it to a U.S. airport, having been informed that their visa had been revoked before they could board the plane. 

There are different ways to deal with this issue depending on the individual situation and plans. If an international student or foreign worker has strong evidence to prove that he/she did not have the intention to defraud the government, he/she may try to contest any fraud charge. There is a waiver available to those who can establish that their deportation will result in extreme hardship to their U.S. citizen or legal resident spouse or parent. Some others may choose to depart the U.S. to avoid an adverse finding by DHS and accrual of unlawful presence. However, given the current pandemic situation and travel bans, it may not be easy for students to go back to their home country.

Before making any decisions, we suggest that international students and foreign workers first consult with an experienced immigration lawyer to explore their options.  One person's solution may not work for another. 

(Immigration laws and policies change regularly.  If you have any questions regarding this article, please visit www.1visa1.com to schedule legal consultation.) 

Stop - Before Signing That Application!

Have you ever signed any legal documents without reading through them? You may feel like it is too time-consuming to go through the fine print or the terms are too technical to understand. Or maybe it is a take-it-or-leave-it contract that you cannot change its term.  However, generally speaking, once a legal document is signed, its terms are binding on the parties.  One may not use her failure to read before signing as an excuse to escape responsibilities under its terms.

The same strict rule applies in immigration applications. In Matter of Valdez, the Board of Immigration Appeals held that an applicant’s signature on an immigration application creates a strong presumption that the signer knows and consents to the contents of the application. Unless there is fraud, deceit, or other wrongful acts by another person, not having read or understanding the application is no excuse.

Mr. Valdez in the case was petitioned by a Catholic Church for a working visa in 1997, to work as a minister at the church. Three years later, Mr. Valdez and his wife were granted permanent resident status based on his status as a religious worker. However, he was never employed by the church. In 2011, when he applied for admission as a returning resident at the airport, he was stopped for questioning and later admitted that he never worked as a religious worker in the U.S. The couple were later charged with willful misrepresentation of a material fact by the Department of Homeland Security.

In removal proceedings before the Immigration Judge, Mr. Valdez denied the accusation and claimed that neither he nor his wife was aware of the contents of the applications because, as Venezuelans, they did not speak or read English. The only thing he knew was his legal representative's promise that for $15,000 he and his wife could get permanent resident status “through the church”.

The Immigration Judge held that even though the couple did not know English and no one ever translated the applications, they cannot use that as an excuse because it is reasonable to expect the applicants will take steps to understand the documents that they sign, or obtain a translation if necessary. Also, despite the fact that the couple reckoned the legal representative's promise to get them permanent residence was “too good to be true”, they never made any effort to find out how they could do that in any of their meetings with the representative before filing.

The Board also used asylum regulations to support the concept that a person’s signature establishes a strong presumption that the signer understands and assents to the document that he or she signed. Unless there is evidence of fraud, coercion, or other wrongful acts, the Board held that failure to read an applicant is insufficient to get the signer off the hook.

Immigration law is complicated. The applications are sometimes confusing and policies are changing constantly -- it is even difficult for immigration professionals to keep up with all the requirements.  One should not completely rely on agents, consultants, notarios, etc. just because they speak their language.  When in doubt, applicants should consult with an experienced immigration lawyer before filing. If the application was prepared by someone else, it is extremely important for applicants to review the contents carefully and obtain translation, if needed, before signing their names.