Caremax Inc v. Holder

Good Law
40 F. Supp. 3d 1182·2014 WL 1493621·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53225
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaApril 16, 2014No. C 13-02412 CRBCalifornia3,771 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Breyer, J.

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT

In this declaratory relief action, Plaintiffs ask the Court to determine, in the context of an administrative agency’s decision not to grant a nonimmigrant visa, whether a non-citizen employee’s job constitutes a “specialty occupation” under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) and if so, whether the non-citizen employee meets the minimum qualifications for employment in said “specialty occupation.” The distinction between specialty occupation and non-specialty occupation is important because the INA authorizes temporary visas for qualified nonimmigrant aliens who are sponsored by an employer to perform a “specialty occupation.” Health services corporation CareMax and its proposed public relations specialist Sen Guo (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) argue that the government defendants (“Defendants”) have incorrectly relied on a determination by United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) that Guo’s position as an entry-level public relations specialist is not a “specialty occupation,” and that even if it is, Guo does not meet the minimum qualifications for employment in a specialty occupation. Because USCIS’s decision was not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.