text:
H-1B Articles
H-1B Work Visa Cap Season Is Underway – Opens for New Filings on April 1, 2015
On April 1, 2015 the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will start accepting applications for one of the most popular U.S. work visas, H-1B, for fiscal year (FY) 2016. Our intelligence and past experience suggest that this year's H-1B cap season will be very short — five business days. Our office is already preparing a number of H-1B applications for our clients and we urge employers to prepare for a very short H-1B season by identifying and initiating H-1B sponsorship cases now.
About the H-1B Program and the Annual Cap
The H-1B visa category was created in 1990 through the Nationality and Immigration Act of 1990 (INA). Upon the creation of the H-1B visa type, INA imposed a numerical limitation ("cap") on the number of H-1Bs that could be issued in each fiscal year. This "cap" (or quota) has varied over the past years but is set to 65,000 per year for FY2016 starting on October 1, 2015.
H-1B is a nonimmigrant visa classification used by U.S. employers to hire a foreign national who will be employed temporarily in the U.S. in a specialty occupation (generally one which requires a bachelor's degree or higher) or as a fashion model. Each year, by law, USCIS can approve up to new 65,000 H-1Bs, thereby allowing many private and employers to hire temporary qualified workers. H-1B non-immigrants who work at (but not necessarily for) universities and non-profit research facilities are excluded from the numerical cap (see below for discussion of cap-exempt employers).
There are certain exceptions to the congressionally-mandated maximum of 65,000 H-1B visas per fiscal year. The first 20,000 H-1B visas issued to alien workers who obtained their master's degree from a U.S. university are exempt from the 65,000 cap; H-1B visas issued to such U.S. master degree holders subsequent to the first 20,000 are then counted against the overall 65,000 cap. Additionally, the cap does not apply to foreign nationals in the U.S. who are in lawful H-1B status and who are seeking to extend their visa or change employers.
The H-1B Quota and Expectations for This Year
As discussed above, the H-1B cap "opens" on April 1, 2015 and will remain open for new H-1B filings until the 65,000 H-1B limit (plus the 20,000 for U.S. masters degree holders) is reached. While it is impossible to predict exactly when the FY2016 H-1B cap will be reached, it is helpful to provide some context. During the last two years, the H-1B cap was met the first week (five business days) of filing, and we anticipate that this will be the case this year as well.
Historically, for FY2015 (last year), there were 172,500 applications and the cap was reached over the first five days. Previously, in FY2014, there were 130,000 applications and the cap was also reached over the first five days of the filing season. This increasing trend in the rate of H-1B cap filings, together with the improving economy in the United States, suggests that this year's H-1B cap will also be oversubscribed even after only five filing days and will be subject to a random computer-generated lottery.
While it is impossible to predict with certainly at this time how quickly the cap will be reached, it is our expectation that the H-1B cap will be open for only 5 business days and we are advising our clients to be prepared for H-1B cap case filing on April 1, 2015.
Over the next two months our office will monitor very carefully the H-1B application demand and we will be providing timely updates on the H-1B cap filing season, including on cap demand and expectations. Please check back with us often or subscribe to our Weekly Newsletter to receive news and updates related to this H-1B filing season.
High H-1B Cap Demand Expected: How and When to Prepare?
The expected heavy demand in this H-1B filing season means that all H-1B petitions should be submitted on or very shortly after April 1st. It should be noted that it takes at least 10-14 days to prepare and file an H-1B petition (due to the LCA filing requirement, which takes up to 7 business days). First-time H-1B employers should allow an additional 3-5 days. Therefore it is critical to plan ahead to maximize your chances of success.
We recommend that employers start working with their immigration attorneys (our office is happy to help – contact us) NOW to review the prospective H-1B candidates and to start the preparation process. Some employers may respond that it is too early to start the H-1B process — we disagree. Starting the process as early as January is the perfect time to ensure that an unanticipated issue would not derail the one-time opportunity to file an H-1B under the cap. For example, some employers' federal tax ID (FEIN) will have to be "registered" with the DOL database in order to even file an LCA. Some job positions run into prevailing wage issues which can take weeks to clear with DOL and even if all goes well, it is always best to be ready with the process and the paperwork early.
Proposed H-1B Cap Timeline
- January – employers work on identifying prospective H-1B candidates for April 1 filings, those include students working on F-1 OPT, new college hires in F-1 status and new hires from abroad. Some employers may have L-1 workers whom they may want to switch to H-1B.
- February 1-15 – employers work with attorneys and employees to gather the required information from the company and employee.
- February 15-28 – attorneys file the Labor Condition Application (LCA) with DOL (DOL takes up to seven business days to process an LCA; and if the employer's FEIN has not previously been verified, this may take additional 3-5 days.)
- March 1-15 – attorney finalizes relevant H-1B documents; employers sign and complete the paperwork and send it to the attorney's office (original documents are required for submission with USCIS and early courier delivery should give enough time for unanticipated – even in March – weather delays).
- March 15-30 – attorney assemble final petition filing packages and complete final quality assurance checks.
- April 1 – attorney files the H-1B petition with USCIS by courier delivery.
Action Items
We urge all employers who are considering filing H-1B petitions under this year's H-1B cap to start the preparation process. Our office stands ready to assist employers in the process and our office is already in "H-1B cap mode" for a number of our clients have already started the preparation process. Please contact us if we can help you in evaluating and, possibly, in preparing an H-1B cap case this April.
On February 18, 2015, our office will also hold a free webinar on the H-1B cap season to discuss H-1B cap preparation and filing strategies. This is one of our most popular webinars for the year and while registration is free, space is limited so interested H-1B employers should register early.
While we do not yet know how quickly this year's H-1B cap would be reached, indications of the heavy interest early this year and last year's historical data suggest for a very short (5-day) H-1B cap filing window. In fact, we urge our clients and readers to assume that the H-1B cap season will last only five days and to aim for April 1, 2015 H-1B petition filing.
If you wish to start a new H-1B work visa petition under this year's quota, or if our office can be of any help, please contact us as soon as possible. Our attorneys and professionals stand ready to review your case, as part of our free initial consultation, and will help you prepare a strong H-1B application.
No commentsCase Processing Statistics from the Department of Labor (FY2014 Q4)
The Department of Labor has provided some updates for the fourth quarter of the Fiscal Year 2014 (July 1, 2014 to September 30, 2014) on their processing of PERM, H-1B LCA and prevailing wage determination cases and we are happy to share them with our clients and readers.
DOL Processing Statistics (Fourth Quarter, 2014 Fiscal Year)
According to the report, during the quarter, there were 21,559 new cases received (an increase of 3% from the same period in the prior year), 15,401 certified (notable decrease over the previous quarters), 1,065 denied (decrease, but in proportion of the rate of new filings) and 1,035 withdrawn (about the same as the prior quarter).
There are 59,901 applications pending as of September 30, 2014 with approximately 60% in analyst review stage (slight decrease), 30% under audit review (slight increase) and 9% on appeal (slight decrease. It is interesting to note that there were no cases reported in supervised recruitment — we believe that this may be incorrect reporting, because there are supervised recruitment cases right now at DOL.
Prevailing Wage Determinations
The prevailing wage report provides some detailed breakdown of the rate of filings in addition to details about top employers, top occupations and top areas. During the fourth quarter, there were approximately 37,000 prevailing wage determination requests filed — of those, 31,738 were for PERM cases (increase of 3% compared to prior year's period), 1,558 were for H-1B cases (decrease of 14%) and 3,357 were for H-2B cases (decrease of 40%). In terms of activity, 36,247 prevailing wage determinations were issued during the fourth quarter and the pending load has remained steady over the past quarters to about 14,619.
The H-1B/LCA report also provides a breakdown in the rate of filings, in addition to some details about the top LCA filers and the top positions and geographic areas. Since this quarter fell entirely outside of the H-1B cap filing season, the number of LCA filings is lower compared to other quarters during the year, and especially Q2. Even then, there were 93,796 H-1B LCA filings in the fourth quarter. During the quarter, there were 90,367 LCAs certified for 178,352 positions (one LCA can include more than 1 position).
According to DOL, 100% of the LCAs are processed timely within seven days of receipt. The rate of LCA denial is fairly low (2,390 out of 100,620 determinations) and the main reasons remain (1) FEIN mismatch or failure to verify before LCA filing or (2) prevailing wage tracking number issues.
The fourth quarter of the FY2014 shows increase in the number of DOL filings in a number of categories. It is interesting to see that the rate of PERM prevailing wage requests has been going up over the past two quarters, which is likely to translate into a higher number of PERM filings and, as a result, increase in PERM case processing times. We are hopeful that DOL would continue to work on decreasing its load and processing times, especially for the PERM cases. We will continue monitoring DOL processing metrics and report any notable developments and trends. Please visit us again or subscribe to our free weekly newsletter to ensure that you obtain this and related immigration-related news and announcements.
No commentsChange in H-1B Work Location – To Amend or Not to Amend?
Our office handles a substantial number of H-1B work visa petitions for a variety of U.S. employers and we often share our direct experiences with the H-1B work visa program. This article is intended to share our experience and the current trends with respect to H-1B work visa petitions where there is a change in the job location once the H-1B work visa petition has been approved and during its validity term. The lack of clear, direct and consistent guidance by USCIS makes it ever more important to carefully analyze a particular H-1B change in job site situation to avoid H-1B status disruption and/or revocation.
The Problem – H-1B Workers Changing Job Locations
Many companies, and especially IT consulting companies who hire H-1B workers and place them at third-party client sites, are well familiar with this situation. It is very common for these H-1B workers to change projects, end clients or simply to relocate to a different client site during their H-1B validity period (which is 3 years most often). In such cases, the question arises, What should be done to ensure that the H-1B employer and employee remain in compliance with the relevant H-1B regulations?
There is fair amount of confusion among H-1B employers and workers with respect to their obligations when there is a change in the work location. Below we discuss what is the currently recommended approach and also recent USCIS developments in this area.
The Law: Material Change in Terms of Employment Requires H-1B Amendment
The relevant regulations are fairly clear — 8 CFR 214.2(h)(2)(i)(E) states:
The petitioner shall file an amended or new petition, with fee, with the Service Center where the original petition was filed to reflect any material changes in the terms and conditions of employment or training or the alien's eligibility as specified in the original approved petition. An amended or new H-1C, H-1B, H-2A, or H-2B petition must be accompanied by a current or new Department of Labor determination. In the case of an H-1B petition, this requirement includes a new labor condition application.
Also, petitioners are required to notify USCIS immediately if the terms and conditions of the H-1B petition "may affect eligibility". 8 CFR 214.2(h)(11)(i)(A) (emphasis added) states:
The petitioner shall immediately notify the Service of any changes in the terms and conditions of employment of a beneficiary which may affect eligibility under section 101(a)(15)(H) of the Act and paragraph (h) of this section. An amended petition on Form I-129 should be filed when the petitioner continues to employ the beneficiary.
In this context the question arises, Does a change in the place of employment only, without any additional changes in the terms of employment (salary, title, duties) constitute a material change and/or whether such change "may affect eligibility" for H-1B?
The LCA/H-1B Amendment Guidance Evolution
In the past, some H-1B employers have been able to rely on unclear guidance by USCIS as to whether a new LCA for a new jobsite location requires an amendment. For example, in an October 23, 2003 Letter from Efren Hernandez III, Dir., Bus. and Trade Branch of USCIS, Mr. Hernandez specifically expresses guidance that H-1B amendment is not required where the H-1B worker is placed at a new location as long as there is an LCA for this new jobsite. Over the past years, however, this guidance has been slowly and gradually superseded by a more strict interpretation of the H-1B regulations.
However, in California Service Center discussions from 2011, some of which were prompted by a number of "Notice of Intent to Revoke" notices, it became apparent that the California Service Center started to consider a change in the job location a "material change" and, as a result, requiring an H-1B amendment to be filed. According to the California Service Center, as of August 10, 2011, "it is the position of [California Service Center] Counsel that an amended H-1B petition should be filed if an LCA is filed after approval of an H-1B petition."
As a result of the lack of clear guidance from USCIS headquarters, the California and Vermont Service Centers (the two service centers responsible for H-1B) had adopted their own and different approaches. California took the more stringent position that a new LCA due to change in the jobsite is a material change requiring amendment, while Vermont had been more lenient in this interpretation. This has caused many employers to rely on the relaxed Vermont treatment and proceed for an LCA only when an H-1B worker changes jobsites. Even during the last few years, our recommendation had been to err on the side of caution and consider filing an H-1B amendment with USCIS at all times, even for Vermont Service Center H-1 cases.
Change in Job Location Requiring a New LCA Is Material Change and Requires H-1B Amendment Filing
Recent trends coming from the Vermont Service Center and from recent Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) indicate that USCIS may be adopting a more uniform and more stringent approach to handling H-1B petitions with a job location change. This means that USCIS is adopting the California Service Center approach of requiring H-1B amendment for each LCA jobsite change. For example, in a non-precedent AAO decision dated as of July 23, 2014, USCIS explicitly overruled the 2003 Hernandez letter and took the position that the Vermont Service Center properly revoked an H-1B petition where there was a jobsite change and LCA without an H-1B amendment filing.
Based on recent trends we see in both the California and Vermont Service Center H-1B cases, it is becoming clear that the best approach to H-1B compliance in change of worksite situations is to consider a new LCA and an H-1B amendment filing before the beginning of the new worksite placement.
We understand that the H-1B amendment filing incurs an additional cost but this cost of compliance should be compared to the possibility of H-1B revocation and the significantly higher monetary and business opportunity cost of H-1B status and business relationship disruption in the event of H-1B audit or revocation proceeding.
We are aware that USCIS is working on official guidance on this topic which would, hopefully, provide more clear guidance applicable to both service centers. Unfortunately, there is no known or anticipated release date. In the meantime, based on recent developments and trends we see, we are recommending that H-1B amendment petitions be filed when there is a change of job location all the time and before the placing the H-1B worker at the new jobsite. We are also happy to work with our clients to make a comprehensive compliance plan for prompt and cost-effective LCA/H-1B compliance. H-1B employers who routinely place workers at third-party worksites should consider making such LCA/H-1B compliance plans. Contact us to allow us to evaluate your needs and provide suggestions for compliance planning.
We invite you to subscribe to our free weekly immigration newsletter to receive timely updates on this and related topics. In the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions or comments, or if we can be of any assistance with analyzing or filing H-1B petitions, including amendments.
No commentsHappy New (Fiscal) Year – Immigration Implications of the New Government Fiscal Year
While few, if any, of our clients and readers will be planning major celebrations, October 1st is an important date as it marks the beginning of the new government fiscal year. This has some immigration implications for many folks — for example, H-1B cap petitions are becoming effective and the quotas for green card visa numbers are being reset for the new fiscal year.
Approved H-1B Cap Petitions (and Change of Status) Becoming Effective
October 1st is the earliest starting date for an H-1B petition filed in April under the annual cap. As a result, almost all H-1B cap petitions have a starting date of October 1.
Notes for H-1B Employers. Employers who have sponsored H-1B cap cases and have received approvals with change of status can now employ their workers on H-1B status. In fact, such H-1B employers must provide employment to H-1B beneficiaries whose status was changed to H-1B on October 1st — not offering employment and pay may cause issues due to possible benching without pay claims.
If the H-1B cap petition was approved on the basis of "consular processing" (no I-94 card issued as part of the approval), then H-1B employers will need to have their workers either (a) obtain H-1B visa stamp at a US Consulate abroad and travel to the U.S. on H-1B status or, if the worker is in the US, (b) file for a change of status to H-1B from within the U.S. and wait for an approval before H-1B employment can legally start.
Notes for H-1B Workers. Workers who have received H-1B cap approval with change of status (I-94 card attached to the bottom of H-1B approval notice) should understand that on October 1 their status in the U.S. would automatically change to H-1B and they would be expected to start (or continue) working for the H-1B employer to maintain valid status. In certain situations, for example holders of L-1 or L-2 status, or if the worker is not ready to start employment, the fact that the status would change automatically to H-1B on October 1 is a significant problem. For example, L-1 holders will have to stop working for their L-1 employer and start working for their H-1B employer. Our office can help analyze this situation and provide solutions or suggestions – a phone consultation is a quick and effective way to do so.
As noted above in the employer's section, if the H-1B cap petition was approved with "consular processing" (no I-94 card), then the H-1B worker will either need to enter the U.S. using H-1B visa or apply to change status from within the U.S.
Annual Visa Number Quotes Reset – Green Card Approvals to Continue
Another important aspect of the new government fiscal year starting on October 1st is the fact that the annual green card visa numbers will reset. At this time this is most important to EB-2 India green card applicants who were affected by the visa unavailability announcement earlier in September. As of October 1, we expect USCIS to continue to issue approvals of pending I-485 cases for EB-2 India nationals with current priority dates (but note the anticipated major EB-2 India cutoff date retrogression later in the fall).
Green card applicants in the remaining green card categories – both family- and employment-based -should not see much difference because of October 1st. Generally, the beginning of a new fiscal year allows the government to allocate a new set of visa numbers for the entire fiscal year but depending on the demand and the pending applications for each category, the government makes different decisions as to how to allocate these numbers and how to advance or retrogress the cutoff dates.
The new government fiscal year has some possible (and sometimes important) implications to many H-1B employers and workers, in addition to a significant number of EB-2 India applicants. Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can review your case, answer any questions or schedule a consultation. We also invite you to subscribe to our free weekly immigration newsletter to receive timely updates on this and related topics.
No commentsF-1 OPT Cap-Gap Allows Employment Only Until September 30th
This year's busy H-1B cap season included many H-1B employee candidates who hold F-1 status and who are employed in the U.S. pursuant to F-1 optional practical training (OPT) status. Out of these F-1 visa holders, many rely on the OPT cap-gap rule to continue working in the U.S. after the post-April 1st expiration date of the OPT and for as long as the H-1B cap petition is not denied or rejected by USCIS. However, the OPT cap-gap rule allows OPT extension only until September 30th, leaving possibly some H-1B candidates in a period of unauthorized employment.
F-1 OPT Cap-Gap Employment Authorization Valid Only Until September 30th
Due to this year's heavy H-1B visa demand, it is likely that USCIS may not be able to adjudicate all H-1B petitions by September 30th. As a result, there are likely to be many cases where the F-1 OPT holder is taking advantage of the OPT cap-gap rule to work after the post-April 1st OPT expiration date based on the pending H-1B petition. Many F-1 students in this situation, however, are not aware that the OPT cap-gap rule applies only until September 30th and if the H-1B cap petition remains pending beyond September 30th, the F-1 holder would no longer be eligible to work in the U.S. under the OPT cap-gap rule (stay in the U.S. is likely to be authorized for as long as the H-1B cap petition seeking change of status to H-1B remains pending).
Am I Affected By This Rule and Am I In Danger of Losing Employment Authorization?
The first step for an F-1 OPT candidate for an H-1B cap visa is to understand whether he or she is affected by this situation. If (1) the candidate's F-1 OPT expiration date was after April 1st but before September 30th, if (2) H-1B cap petition is still pending decision with USCIS, and (3) if the H-1B cap petition was filed requesting change of status, then it is likely that the F-1 candidate may be in danger of losing OPT cap-gap work authorization if the H-1B petition remains pending beyond September 30th.
Early Premium Processing Upgrade May be Needed to Avoid Interruption of Employment Authorization
In those cases where the H-1B cap petition seeking change of status remains pending beyond September 30th, the F-1 OPT cap-gap rule does not permit employment and the F-1 holder will have to stop working as of October 1st and wait until the H-1B petition is approved (or risk violating his or her F-1 status by engaging in unauthorized employment).
To avoid the possibility of a period of lack of employment authorization and disruption at the workplace, we recommend that candidates and their employers consider a premium processing upgrade of their H-1B petition as soon as possible in order to force USCIS to make a decision within 15 days. Please note that USCIS may request additional evidence or RFE (especially if they have not already done so) on the H-1B petition in which case the employer would have to respond to the RFE and then the government would have another 15 days to provide a response.
It is September 30th and My H-1B Petition is Still Pending – What Should I Do?
Most importantly — stop working — because the OPT cap-gap employment authorization ends on September 30th if the H-1B petition is still pending as of that date. If a premium processing upgrade has not been done, it may be a good idea to do so in order to minimize the period without employment authorization and so that the candidate can get back to work as early as possible. Please also consider contacting us for a consultation.
For those affected by the OPT gap-cap rule with a pending H-1B petition we recommend premium processing upgrade as soon as possible to minimize periods without employment authorization and disruption of employment. A timely and properly-filed premium processing upgrade even in late August stands a good chance to allow uninterrupted OPT gap-cap, followed by H-1B, employment authorization.
Please feel free to subscribe to our free weekly newsletter to obtain developments on this and related topics. If our office can be of any help, please feel free to contact us.
No commentsCase Processing Statistics from the Department of Labor (FY2014 Q3)
The Department of Labor has provided some updates for the third quarter of the Fiscal Year 2014 (April 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014) on their processing of PERM, H-1B LCA and prevailing wage determination cases and we are happy to share them with our clients and readers.
DOL Processing Statistics (Third Quarter, 2014 Fiscal Year)
According to the report, during the quarter, there were 20,173 new cases received (significant increase of 15% from the same period in the prior year), 21,076 certified (notable increase over the previous quarters), 1,504 denied (increase, but in proportion of the rate of new filings) and 1,097 withdrawn (slight increase over previous periods).
There are 55,427 applications pending as of June 30, 2014 with approximately 61% in analyst review stage (slight decrease), 28% under audit review (slight increase) and 10% on appeal (slight increase). It is interesting to note that there were no cases reported in supervised recruitment — we believe that this may be incorrect reporting, because there are supervised recruitment cases right now at DOL.
Prevailing Wage Determinations
The prevailing wage report provides some detailed breakdown of the rate of filings in addition to details about top employers, top occupations and top areas. During the third quarter, there were approximately 35,000 prevailing wage determination requests filed — of those, 31,719 were for PERM cases (increase of 9% compared to prior year's period), 2,016 were for H-1B cases (decrease of 9%) and 1,298 were for H-2B cases (decrease of 10%). In terms of activity, more prevailing wage determinations were issued in Q3 compared to prior quarters – 36,247 and the pending load has decreased to 14,308 applications (down by 8%).
The H-1B/LCA report also provides a breakdown in the rate of filings, in addition to some details about the top LCA filers and the top positions and geographic areas. Since this quarter fell entirely outside of the H-1B cap filing season, the number of LCA filings is lower compared to other quarters during the year, and especially Q2. Even then, there were 101,629 H-1B LCA filings in the third quarter. During the quarter, there were 99,876 LCAs certified for 155,524 positions (one LCA can include more than 1 position).
According to DOL, 100% of the LCAs are processed timely within seven days of receipt (last year's period metric was 99%). The rate of LCA denial is fairly low (3,156 out of 110,562 determinations) and the main reasons remain (1) FEIN mismatch or failure to verify before LCA filing or (2) prevailing wage tracking number issues.
The third quarter of the FY2014 shows increase in the number of DOL filings in a number of categories. It is interesting to see that the rate of PERM prevailing wage requests has been going up, which is likely to translate into a higher number of PERM filings and, as a result, increase in PERM case processing times. We are hopeful that DOL would continue to work on decreasing its load and processing times, especially for the PERM cases. We will continue monitoring DOL processing metrics and report any notable developments and trends. Please visit us again or subscribe to our free weekly newsletter to ensure that you obtain this and related immigration-related news and announcements.
No commentsUSCIS Clarifications on H-1B Nurse Requirements Open Door for More Approvals
In a policy memorandum dated July 11, 2014, USCIS has provided some guidance and clarifications as to the applicable standards for adjudication of H-1B petitions for nurses. While USCIS continues to maintain the position that most nurses may not qualify for an H-1B due to the fact that a bachelor's degree is not normally requires, the policy memorandum highlights specific situations and factors which would help a determination that a specific nursing position is specialized enough to warrant an H-1B. We welcome this (overdue) policy memorandum as it provides a clearer guidance as to which types of nursing positions may qualify for an H-1B work visa.
Background of H-1B for Nurses
Most of our readers are aware that the H-1B visa classification allows a U.S. employer to petition for a temporary worker in a specialty occupation (normally, a position requiring a bachelor's degree or higher). The government has taken the position that most registered nurse (RN) positions do not qualify as a specialty occupation because such positions do not normally require a U.S. bachelor's or higher degree in nursing (or its equivalent) as the minimum for entry into those particular positions. There are some situations, however, where the petitioner may be able to show that a nursing position qualifies as a specialty occupation. For example, certain advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) positions normally require a U.S. bachelor's or higher degree in a specific specialty as the minimum for entry into these particular positions.
As a result, there has often been ambiguity as to whether a specific nursing position would qualify for an H-1B work visa or not. Our office, for example, has handled variety of nursing H-1B cases and so far the success factor has been a showing of advanced or highly-specialized nursing requirements.
The Policy Memorandum Recognized Shift Towards Employers Increasingly Requiring Nurses with Bachelor's Degree or Higher
The policy memorandum reiterates the general position that nursing positions do not normally require a bachelor's degree and, as a result, would not fit within the scope of the H-1B work visa. At the same time, however, the policy memorandum makes an important recognition that the private sector in the U.S. is increasingly showing a preference for "more highly educated nurses." The policy memorandum goes on to make a specific distinction that certain nursing positions would actually meet the "specialty occupation" definition and would qualify for H-1B. This is an important step towards recognizing H-1Bs for nurses.
At the same time, the policy memorandum also specifies that advance practice registered nurse (APRN) positions use skills, experience and knowledge which are consistent with the "specialty occupation" standard and for APRN nursing positions, an H-1B should be approved. Specific (but not complete) examples of APRN occupations cited in the policy memorandum which should qualify for H-1B are Certified Nurse-Midwife, Certified Clinical Nurse Specialist, Certified Nurse Practitioner and Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist.
The policy memorandum also includes some suggestions on the type of factors to be presented and considered when adjudicating an H-1B application for a nurse-type position. In addition to normal employer and industry practices, the adjudicator may consider advanced certification requirements, ANCC Magnet recognition status, clinical experience requirements, training requirements and wages relative to others in the position. This kind of list with suggested factors/evidence is very helpful in preparing a strong H-1B work visa application for a nursing position.
We welcome this policy memorandum as it provides an overdue clarification of the H-1B standards as they apply to nursing positions. The policy memorandum recognizes shifts in the private industry marketplace where more and more nurses perform more complex skills and more and more employers seek nurses with advanced level of skills and education. The arguments and factors outlined in the policy memorandum should provide more clarity and, hopefully, certainty in the H-1B application process for employers who are seeking to sponsor an H-1B work visa for a nurse.
We are happy to consult employers who are considering filing for H-1B petitions for nurses. Our office focuses its practice on employment-based immigration matters and we have handled a variety of immigration cases for hospitals, medical facilities and similar health-care related employers. Please feel free to subscribe to our free weekly newsletter to obtain developments on this and related topics. If our office can be of any help, please feel free to contact us.
No commentsEmployment Authorization for Certain H-4 Dependents – Analysis of Proposed Rule
Last week we reported on the announcement of the proposed rule which would allow certain H-4 dependent spouses to apply for and obtain work authorization. Our article generated tremendous interest and feedback from clients and readers but at that time we did not have the actual proposed rule so we could not answer any specific questions about the details and the mechanics of the process, if or when, it becomes part of the regulations. The text of proposed rule has been published in the Federal Register and now we are able to provide more details and analysis of the proposal.
Proposal for Employment Authorization for Certain H-4 Dependent Spouses
First, we should highlight and reiterate that at this point this is only a proposed rule. Until and unless this rule becomes part of the relevant regulations, there would be no framework and possibility for H-4 spouses to apply for work authorization.
Proposed Rule. DHS is proposing to allow employment authorization to certain H–4 dependent spouses of principal H–1B nonimmigrants who are in the process of seeking lawful permanent resident status through employment. Eligible H-4 spouses would spouses of H–1B nonimmigrants if the H–1B nonimmigrants are either the beneficiaries of an approved Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I–140) or have been granted an extension of their authorized period of admission in the United States under the section 106(a) and (b) of American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (AC21). Section 106(a) and 106(b) of AC21 allow H-1B status extension of the H-1B nonimmigrant is the beneficiary of a PERM Labor Certification or an I-140 petition which has been pending for more than 365 days.
Rationale Behind the Proposed Rule. By proposing employment authorization for certain H-4 spouses, DHS believes that this proposal would further encourage H–1B skilled workers to remain in the United States, continue contributing to the U.S. economy, and not abandon their efforts to become lawful permanent residents, to the detriment of their U.S. employer, because their H–4 nonimmigrant spouses are unable to obtain work authorization. This proposal would also remove the disincentive for many H–1B families to start the immigrant process due to the lengthy waiting periods associated with acquiring status as a lawful permanent resident of the United States.
H-4 Children Not Included. It should be noted that the proposed rule explicitly states that H-4 dependent children will not be eligible for EAD under this proposed rule.
Mechanics of the Proposed H-4 Spouse EAD Application Process
The proposed rule would add eligible H-4 spouses to the list of nonimmigrants eligible to apply for an employment authorization document (EAD). The application will be filed using the current Form I-765, together with filing fees, photos and supporting documents to establish eligibility for this new class of EAD.
EAD Validity and Extensions. As with most other EAD classes, employment would be authorized only after the EAD has been approved and only during the validity of the approved EAD document. The proposed rule mentions that USCIS is considering that such EADs will be issued with validity of up to two years, recognizing that even if USCIS were to issue a longer EAD validity period, it cannot exceed the applicant H-4 spouse's H-4 status validity period. Extensions can be filed up to 120 days in advance of expiration of the current EAD term (and assuming continuing H-4 status and extension eligibility) and EAD extensions can be (and perhaps should be) filed together with H-4 status extensions.
Documentation of Eligibility. Since the EADs under this proposed rule would be issued only to a limited set of H-4 spouses, the EAD application would require enhanced documentation to show eligibility. The proposed rule mentions that in addition to the application form, fee and required passport photos, the EAD application would seek evidence that the H-1B nonimmigrant spouse is beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition or has PERM Labor Certification or I-140 petition filed more than 365 days prior; in addition to evidence of the applicant's H-4 status validity and duration.
Rulemaking Process Timeline – When Would This Rule Become Effective?
The proposed rule is now subject to public review and comment. This comment period is scheduled to end on July 11, 2014 (see the rule text for information on how you can submit comments to this proposed rule – anyone can do so). Once the comment period closes, DHS would review the comments and either revise the rule in response to concerns or seek to publish a final rule. The final rule, once published, will have a future effective date.
At this time it is not clear if or when this rule would become effective — but it is unlikely that H-4 spouses would be able to file EADs before the summer's end. Please stay tuned to our website or newsletter for more updates on the timeline and the effective date for this rule over the next couple of months.
We welcome DHS's publication of the proposed rule and we believe that many eligible H-4 spouses would benefit from a permission to work while waiting for their spouses' green card to be approved (several years in some cases). However, we would like to again caution that these are only the proposed (and not the final) rules. Our office will monitor this process over the next weeks and provide additional updates, including estimates and actual dates of when such EAD applications can be filed.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can review your case, answer any questions or schedule a consultation. We also invite you to subscribe to our free weekly immigration newsletter to receive timely updates on this and related topics.
No commentsThe H-1B Cap Has Been Reached – What Are the Alternative Visa Options?
Many of our readers are aware that as of April 7, 2014, USCIS had received a sufficient number of H-1B cap-subject petitions to fill the annual H-1B quota. All cap-subject new H-1B petitions received by USCIS on or after April 7th have been or are currently in the process of being rejected and sent back and our office is starting to field a number of inquiries from candidates who were either not selected under the H-1B cap or were not able to file on time as to what are the alternatives to H-1B. We are happy to provide an overview of the more common H-1B alternative visa options and our office is happy to provide a more individualized case analysis.
The H-1B Cap Season Numbers
This year there were 172,500 applications filed, for the 85,000 available H-1B cap visas, resulting in a simple calculation of about 50% chance that an application will be selected for processing under the H-1B cap. This is in comparison to last year's cap, fiscal year 2014 (FY2014), when there were 124,000 applications for the same number of H-1B cap visas. This 40% increase in the H-1B cap demand this year compared to last year's was evident early in the year and while our office had a great rate of H-1B cap acceptance, well exceeding the average of 50%, there are nonetheless H-1B candidates who were not accepted for processing under the H-1B cap.
As a result, some employer and prospective employees who wanted to take advantage of the H-1B program this year are unable to do so — either because they were unable to file between April 1st and 7th or because their application was not picked by the H-1B lottery. We seek to provide some alternatives which may be available.
Alternatives to H-1B Cap Petitions
Now that the H-1B quota has been reached, we are receiving an increasing number of inquiries by both cap-subject employers and prospective employees about the alternatives for work authorization between now and October 1, 2015, when the new fiscal year's H-1B quota would begin (as a reminder, April 1, 2015 is the earliest a cap-subject H-1B application can be filed). We describe some of the most common H-1B visa alternatives. Note that the list is not intended to exhaust all possible visa types and scenarios pursuant to which an employee may be legally employed. Our goal is to list some of the common options for the benefit of our clients and readers. We are happy to discuss individual cases as part of our initial consultation.
Cap-Exempt H-1B
A number of employers may qualify to be cap-exempt and are allowed to file for H-1B petition at any time. A cap-exempt employer is (1) an institution of higher education, (2) related or affiliated to a higher education institution nonprofit entity, or (3) nonprofit research organization or a governmental research organization. Please see our cap-exempt H-1B employer guide. As a result, many educational institutions, non-profit and research organizations may qualify to file cap-exempt H-1Bs. We are happy to help evaluate whether an employer can qualify to be cap-exempt.
O-1 or P-1 Extraordinary Ability Visas
O-1 and P-1 visas are generally reserved for individuals who have extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts (including the television and motion picture industry), education, business, or athletics. By definition, not many individuals qualify for one or both of these visa types, but where possible, an application for O-1 and/or P-1 should be prepared in lieu of H-1B. In addition to being able to obtain work authorization pursuant to these visa types, an O-1 and/or P-1 approval may establish the basis for the subsequent application for an EB-1 category permanent residency. Please contact us if you would like our help in evaluating your O-1 and/or P-1 visa case.
L-1 Intracompany Transferee
The L-1 visa type allows multinational companies who have presence abroad to transfer their employees from their overseas offices to their U.S. office (or to establish a new U.S. office). This visa type is a good option for foreign employers seeking to establish or boost their U.S. presence and for foreign nationals currently employed abroad. Foreign nationals who are currently in the U.S. generally will not qualify for L-1 visa. An added benefit to the L-1 visa is that family members are entitled to a work authorization pursuant to L-2 status.
TN for Canadian and Mexican Professional Workers
An option available to certain Canadian and Mexican nationals in certain occupations is the TN visa classification. It is available to citizens of Canada and Mexico who would be employed in the U.S. in one of the designated occupations. The TN visa is not subject to a cap and can be obtained fairly easily either by applying at the border (for Canadians) or by filing a petition with USCIS. Please see more information on the TN visa classification.
E-1/E-2 Treaty Trader or Investor
The E-1/E-2 visas allow nationals of countries with which the U.S. has trade treaties to invest an amount in the U.S. and receive an E-1 (treaty trader) or E-2 (treaty investor) visa. See a list of treaty countries.
The E-1 treaty trader visa is suitable if the foreign national has a multinational employer who is willing to transfer them, and the company has significant trade between the foreign country and the U.S. The employee must also have skills which are essential to the operation of the company trade. Dependents of E-1 visa holder are eligible for work in the U.S.
The E-2 treaty investor allows foreign nationals to invest (preferably) a substantial amount in the U.S. and obtain an E-2 visa to be able to manage and direct their investment. The amount required for investment generally varies depending on the industry (the so called, proportionality test) with more capital-intensive industries requiring more significant investment for E-2 application. Dependents of E-2 visa holders are eligible to apply for work authorization.
H-1B Program Changes by Congress Possible, Although Timing is Uncertain
It has become a pattern that after every H-1B cap season ends, resulting in a high number of disappointed employers and employees who did not make it under the lottery, there is increased talk about raising the H-1B cap limit. There are proposals and much talk here in Washington, DC about this kind of a chance in the H-1B program; however, as of this time, there is no proposal or law which would become law any time soon. As we have done in the past, our office would continue to monitor and report on any developments relating to relief to H-1B employers and workers, so stay tuned.
Wait and File on April 1, 2015 for the FY2016 Cap
For some of our clients, waiting until April 1, 2015 to file a new cap-subject H-1B petition may be the best (or only?) option. The H-1B visa type, although subject to some requirements, is a fairly common visa type for which many qualified employees are eligible. As of now, and assuming any proposed immigration reform is not enacted by then, the FY2016 H-1B cap is expected to be the same as it was for the FY2015 fiscal year – 65,000 H-1B visas (plus 20,000 for holders of U.S. master's degrees).
Upcoming Webinar on H-1B Cap Alternatives
We would like to take this opportunity to invite you to our next webinar, scheduled for May 21, 2014 at 12:30 pm eastern time where our attorneys will have a more in-depth discussion of this year's H-1B cap and, specifically, these visa alternatives. Registration and participation is free — please submit your free registration soon as there is a limit on the number of seats we can accommodate.
Our office will continue to monitor developments relating to the H-1B program, this and next year's caps and the immigration proposals. In the meantime, please feel free to subscribe to our free weekly newsletter to obtain developments on this and related topics. If our office can be of any help with any of the H-1B visa alternative options, please feel free to contact us.
No commentsUSCIS Proposes Rules Allowing Employment Authorization to Certain H-4 Spouses
Over the past few weeks (and months, really), there has been some chatter about a possible change in the regulations to allow certain H-4 spouses to apply for and obtain work authorization. In a press release today, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has announced that the proposed rules are to be published for review and comment very soon. Under one of the proposed rules, H-4 spouses would be allowed to request employment authorization in cases where the H-1B worker spouse has already started their green card process. Similarly, certain E-3, H-1B1 (Chile and Singapore) rules are being changed to allow such workers to continue to remain in the US.
Proposed Rule Would Allow Employment Authorization to Spouses of H-1B Workers Who Have Started Green Card Process
According to DHS, this proposed rule will amend existing regulations to allow H-4 dependent spouses of certain principal H-1B workers to request employment authorization.
Under current rules, the H-1B work authorization given to a worker does not extend to H-4 status dependents. The change proposed by DHS would allow H-4 dependent spouses of certain H-1B nonimmigrant workers to request employment authorization, as long as the H-1B worker has already started the process of seeking lawful permanent residence through employment.
Eligible individuals would include H-4 dependent spouses of principal H-1B workers who:
- Are the beneficiaries of an approved Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; or
- Have been granted an extension of their authorized period of stay in the United States under the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (AC21) (more articles on AC21) as amended by the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act. AC21 permits H-1B workers seeking lawful permanent residence to work and remain in the United States beyond the six-year limit.
Proposed Rule Would Allow E-3, H-1B1 and CW-1 Workers More Flexibility to Remain in the U.S.
Another proposed rule change would enhance opportunities for certain groups of highly-skilled and transitional workers by removing obstacles to their remaining in the United States. It would affect workers in specialty occupation nonimmigrant classifications for professionals from Chile and Singapore (H-1B1) and Australia (E-3), as well as Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Island (CNMI)-Only Transitional Workers (CW-1).
Under current regulations, employers of workers in E-3 (Australia), H-1B1 (Chile or Singapore), or CW-1 status must generally file a petition requesting the extension of the employee's status well before the initial authorized duration of status expires.
Specifically, the change to the regulation would regulation would:
- Update the regulations to include nonimmigrant high-skilled specialty occupation professionals from Chile and Singapore (H-1B1) and from Australia (E-3) in the list of classes of aliens authorized for employment incident to status with a specific employer,
- Clarify that H-1B1 and principal E-3 nonimmigrants are allowed to work without having to separately apply to DHS for employment authorization.
- Allow E-3, H-1B1 and CW-1 nonimmigrant workers up to 240 days of continued work authorization beyond the expiration date noted on their Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Record, while the extension request is pending.
Important Note: Proposed Rules Are Not Law (Yet)
We would like to caution our clients and readers that this is only the initial step in the process of the change in the rules. These are only the proposed rules. The proposed notices will be published soon (we will provide an update once they are) for the public review and comment period. After the comment period ends, DHS will review and consider comments made by the public and consider whether to change the proposed rules in any way. Only once the final rule has been released and published by DHS would these rules become the law.
As a result of this rulemaking process, it may be months before these rules go into effect. There may be an additional period to allow USCIS to adjust their systems/processes to accept the new employment authorization benefit which is proposed to certain H-4 spouses.
We welcome DHS's announcement of the proposed rules and we believe that many H-4 spouses would benefit from a permission to work while waiting for their spouses' green card to be approved (several years in some cases). However, we would like to caution that these are only the proposed (and not the final) rules. Our office will monitor this process over the next weeks and provide updates, including links and analysis of the actual proposed rules, when they are published.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can review your case, answer any questions or schedule a consultation. We also invite you to subscribe to our free weekly immigration newsletter to receive timely updates on this and related topics.
No comments


text:
HMS Curacoa (D41)
Curacoa in 1941
Career (United Kingdom) | |
Class and type: | C-class light cruiser |
Name: | HMS Curacoa |
Builder: | Pembroke Dockyard Harland and Wolff |
Laid down: | July 1916 |
Launched: | 5 May 1917 |
Commissioned: | 18 February 1918 |
Reclassified: | Converted to anti-aircraft cruiser from August 1939 until April 1940 |
Fate: | Sunk in collision with RMS Queen Mary, 2 October 1942 |
General characteristics | |
Tons burthen: | 4,190 tons |
Length: | 450 ft (140 m) |
Beam: | 43.6 ft (13.3 m) |
Draught: | 14 ft (4.3 m) |
Propulsion: | Two Brown-Curtis geared turbines Six Yarrow boilers Two propellers 40,000 shp |
Speed: | 29 knots |
Range: | carried 300 tons (950 tons maximum) of fuel oil |
Complement: | 327 |
Armament: | 5 × 6-inch (152 mm) guns 2 × 3-inch (76 mm) guns 2 × 2 pounder (907g) guns 8 × 21-inch torpedo tubes |
Armour: | 3-inch side (amidships) 2¼–1½ inch side (bows) 2-inch side (stern) 1 inch upper decks (amidships) 1 inch deck over rudder |
Notes: | Certamine summo: 'In the midst of battle' |
HMS Curacoa, named after the island Curaçao in the Caribbean Sea, was a Ceres group C-class light cruiser. In 1942, she became one of the Royal Navy's major accidental losses during the Second World War.
First World War[edit]
Her first service was with the Grand Fleet during the last days of the First World War. During the RN Operations in support of the White Russians against the Bolsheviki in 1918, et seq., she was a part of the RN's "Task Force". During these Operations, she suffered mine damage 70 miles east of Reval while en route for Libau, which sent her back to a UK Dockyard for repair. The Captain was in his bath at the time and the concussion dumped him out of it, and he ran for the bridge "dripping wet and starkers" until clothing could be brought up from his "day cabin". One crewmember was killed by the explosion. HMS Curacoa ended her Baltic deployment as Task Force Flagship, before returning to the UK and being re-deployed to the Mediterranean, where she remained until 1928. Later, in 1935, she was one of four Royal Navy ships featured in the film Brown on Resolution, where she played a German battlecruiser.[1]
Second World War[edit]
In 1939, a few months before the outbreak of the Second World War in Europe, she was selected for conversion to an anti-aircraft cruiser and underwent a refit at Chatham Dockyard.[2] She then served with the Home Fleet during the Norwegian Campaign in 1940, until, on 24 April, she sustained heavy damage from aerial bombing and suffered 30 casualties. She returned to Chatham for repairs[2] and resumed active duty in August, serving with the Nore Command convoy defence. During "Warship Week" in March 1942, she was adopted by the civil community of Wolverhampton.[2]
On 2 October 1942 about 60 km north of the coast of Ireland she was escorting the ocean liner RMS Queen Mary carrying 10,000 American troops of the 29th Infantry Division[3] to join the Allied forces in Europe.[4] Queen Mary was steaming an evasive zig-zagging course; eight minutes to starboard, eight minutes to port then the resumption of her base course for four minutes before starting the cycle again, which Curacoa could not match because of deterioration of her engines.[citation needed] Curacoa was hard pressed to keep pace with the liner as it was and her Captain opted to forego the zig-zag so as to be able to maintain a position from which to provide effective anti-aircraft watch.[citation needed] At 2:15 PM the Queen Mary started the starboard turn for the first leg of her zig-zag, cutting across the path of the Curacoa with insufficient clearance, striking her amidships at a speed of 28 knots and cutting her in two. The Curacoa sank in six minutes, about 100 yards from the Queen Mary. Due to the risk of U-boat attacks, the Queen Mary did not assist in rescue operations and instead steamed onward with a damaged bow.[5] Hours later, the convoy's lead escort, consisting of HMS Bramham and one other ship,[6] returned to rescue 99 survivors from the Curacoa's crew of 338, including her captain John Wilfred Boutwood.[1][7][8]
The incident occurred as the result of several factors. The captain of the Queen Mary made the assumption that her escort ship would track her course change and adjust accordingly.[7] Meanwhile, Captain Boutwood on board the Curacoa assumed the standard seafaring rule that an overtaking ship must yield. The resulting convergent courses were reported on board both ships and the Queen Mary's First Officer issued a correction, but both the reports and correction were dismissed by the respective ship's captains.[7]
The loss was not reported until after the war ended, whereupon the Navy immediately pressed charges against the Queen Mary's owners, Cunard White Star Line.[7] The High Court of Justice subsequently ruled mostly in favour of the latter, assigning two-thirds of the blame to the Admiralty and one third to Cunard White Star.[7] This ruling would become important in the civil lawsuits subsequently filed against Cunard White Star Line by relatives of the Curacoa's deceased. It also prompted significant revisions in Royal Navy policy, including the suspension of escorts for passenger liners indefinitely.[7]
Under the Protection of Military Remains Act 1986, the Curacoa's wrecksite is designated a "protected place".[9]
- ^ a b Great War Society (July 2008). "St. Mihiel Trip-Wire: July 2008". WorldWar1.com. Retrieved 10 August 2009.
- ^ a b c Lt Cdr Geoffrey B Mason RN (2004). "Service Histories of the Royal Navy Warships in World War 2". Navy-Histories.net. Retrieved 10 August 2009.
- ^ Joseph Balkoski. Beyond the Beachhead. Stackpole Books. pp. 37–38. ISBN 0-8117-0221-9.
- ^ Brighton CSV Media Clubhouse (11 June 2004). "Archives: HMS Curacao Tragedy". BBC. Retrieved 10 August 2009.
- ^ http://heritage.scotsman.com/disasterstrikes/Queen-Marys-deadly-drama-at.2768340.jp
- ^ http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/80015884 – Interview with Edgar Wilson, seaman aboard the HMS Curacoa during the collision
- ^ a b c d e f "Queen Mary / Curacoa Crash" (DEAD LINK 2013), Disasters of the Century(#21). History Television, Canada.com Network. CanWest Media Inc, 2009.
- ^ uboat.net – Allied Warships – Light cruiser HMS Curacoa of the Ceres class
- ^ Designation under the Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 by SI2008/950, Office of Public Sector Information, The National Archives. Retrieved 17 July 2008.
- Colledge, J. J.; Warlow, Ben (2006) [1969]. Ships of the Royal Navy: The Complete Record of all Fighting Ships of the Royal Navy (Rev. ed.). London: Chatham Publishing. ISBN 978-1-86176-281-8. OCLC 67375475.
- Jane's Fighting Ships of World War One (1919), Jane's Publishing Company.
Further reading[edit]
- D. Thomas, Patrick Homes and P. Holmes: "Queen Mary" and the Cruiser: "Curacoa" Disaster (1997) ISBN 0-85052-548-9 Summary/review.
- Jane's Fighting Ships of WWII
- Stuart and Doris Flexner, The Pessimist's Guide to History (1992).
- David Niven "Go Slowly Come Back Quickly" (1981) ISBN 0-340-28347-5 Pages 121–123 Describes the incident
External links[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to HMS Curacoa (D41). |
- C-class cruisers
- Pembroke-built ships
- 1917 ships
- World War I cruisers of the United Kingdom
- World War II cruisers of the United Kingdom
- Maritime incidents in 1942
- Ships sunk in collisions
- World War II shipwrecks in the Atlantic Ocean
- Protected Wrecks of the United Kingdom
- Maritime incidents in Ireland
- Shipwrecks of Ireland

subset: commoncrawl


text:
HOUSTON — Not only are customers looking for a higher volume of fresh-cut produce, they're looking for more variety and different Stock Keeping Units.
"We have sliced, diced, chunks, halves, peeled — just about anything," said Juan DeFranco, general manager for Chefs' Produce Co. "We also do in-house fresh herbs that are flown in daily."
DeFranco said Chefs' produce is seeing more business, especially from caterers.
"It's easier and cheaper for us to do it than for them," he said. "We have more efficient labor, less waste and better yields."
Brothers Produce also has more customers looking for a variety of cuts, said Brent Erenwert, vice president.
A simple blend like pico de gallo no longer is enough.
"Everybody's going toward processed," he said. "I have requests for things like peeled and halved yams, or diced butternut squash cubes or peeled and cored apples. It's everybody, not just chains."
Brothers Produce doesn't do its own in-house fresh-cut.
"We have people do it for us, and it works well," Erenwert said.
It only makes sense that foodservice operators are picking up on more fresh-cut, Erenwert said. Restaurants have smaller kitchens, smaller staffs and would rather dedicate their space to selling floor.
Albertsons LLC, Boise, Idaho, also does in-house fresh-cut in its Texas stores, said Mike Acrement, produce operations specialist for the central Dallas metro area.
Albertsons established a section of fresh-cut produce in its stores and sells items such as fajita kits and stir-fry mixes in addition to fruit bowls and vegetable trays.
Acrement said diced celery, carrots and onions are particularly popular near heavy cooking holidays such as Christmas and Thanksgiving.
"We also started doing an in-house parfait with berries, yogurt and granola that's been popular," he said.
The 20-ounce parfait retails for $2.99 and is popular for breakfast, lunch or snacks. Its popularity prompted Albertsons to add flavors such as mango and apple.
Fresh by Brookshires in Tyler also does all of its own fresh-cut in-house said George Flores, produce manager.
The fresh-cut room is visible from the main area of the store and has a wide array of fruit and vegetable blends that go along with the store's in-house, chef-prepared items.
Supplying to processors has been a growing area of business for San Antonio-based Murphy Tomatoes, said Brad Corlew, director of national sales.
At Mex Flores Produce, orders of salsa ingredients to processors have picked up dramatically, said Mike Contreras, sales manager.
The company sends a significant amount of tomatillos and other ingredients to Frontera Foods Inc., which makes salsas under the Frontera brand.


text:
Man Cave Podcast – Episode 154
Sean Comer joins the Man Cave for the January edition of the Bad Movie Review Club. This month we tackle Sand Sharks, which, as you'd expect, is a movie about sharks in the sand. We'll talk about Brooke Hogan's acting debut, the greatness of Robert Pike Daniel, and how you can build a town on stupidity. Plus, as always, we'll reveal our February movie.
Man Cave Podcast – Episode 153
Samer Kadi joins the Man Cave to preview UFC 156. Samer does what he does best, which is go in depth in breaking down Jose Aldo vs. Frankie Edgar. We'll talk about the fight in detail, wonder why the UFC didn't properly promote the bout, and give our prediction. Then we'll talk about the rest of the card and hope for Rashad Evans to call out Anderson Silva, give our reservations about Alistair Overeem, and talk about whether or not Demian Maia can submit Jon Fitch. It's the one year anniversary show so enjoy.
Man Cave Podcast – Episode 152
Samer Kadi joins the Man Cave to review UFC in FOX 6. We started by saying that we're going to make this podcast short and then we end up going over an hour thanks to my lack of excitement for the main event, Samer railing against the UFC for not properly promoting Anthony Pettis, and both of us giving up on trying to fix judging. Plus we'll review all the fights in between those rants.
UFC on FOX 6: Johnson vs. Dodson Review – Underwhelming Excitement
My review of UFC on FOX 6, which was a fun card that seemed a little disappointing by the end.
Avalanche Thoughts – The O'Reilly Situation
My thoughts on the contract stalemate between the Colorado Avalanche and Ryan O'Reilly and why the Avs should trade him.
Occupy The Throne – Edition #47
In this edition of Occupy The Throne, Samer Kadi and I look at UFC on FOX 6.
Man Cave Podcast – Episode 151
Adam Tool joins the Man Cave to preview UFC on FOX 6 and talk general MMA news. We'll look at the FOX card and give our thoughts on why Johnson vs. Dodson could kill the crowd, express our excitement for Cerrone vs. Pettis, and Adam raises an interesting question about whether or not the UFC will give Jackson a live mic if he's victorious. Plus we'll look at the UFC 156 card, talk about Johny Hendricks being passed over for a title shot, and discuss other news in the MMA world.


text:
Lesley's Art Institute of Boston students Melissa McGill and Nick Nazzaro accepted to Society of Illustrators Student Scholarship Exhibition
Friday, March 08, 2013
From May 15 to June 5, their work will hang in The Museum of American Illustration at the Society of Illustrators in New York City, and it will also appear in the printed exhibition catalog.
"The AIB Illustration Department was thrilled to hear of Melissa and Nick's achievement. We're very proud of them, and of our department as well," said Assistant Professor Keith MacLelland, acting chair of the Illustration Department. "Being accepted into The Society of Illustrators is a prestigious accomplishment, and one that not every illustrator gets to experience."
McGill and Nazzaro's illustrations were chosen from more than 5,000 entries submitted by professors of college-level students nationwide, and will be among over a hundred works featured in the exhibition.
Melissa McGill's work, titled the "The Office," is a collage made of cut out pieces of paper from magazines, and she relied on shapes and colors to form the two characters from the NBC sitcom, The Office.
"I love drawing caricatures of celebrities, but for this piece I decided to try a new technique," said McGill, who is a senior Illustration major. "I wanted to see if I could successfully communicate who these characters are with collage. It was definitely a challenge but ended up being a fun and different way to caricature."
Nick Nazzaro's work, titled "Fun & Safe," is a digital piece he created with Photoshop in response to recent statements by Wayne LaPierre, head of the National Rifle Association. It depicts children playing with guns instead of water toys and floats in a pool.
"My goal was to point out how ridiculous an idea it is to give children guns in the hopes of them using them responsibly someday," said Nazzaro, also a senior Illustration major, whose work is almost completely digitally created, although he creates the some 3D pieces and original stencils. "My style is very graphic, full of symbols and stylization."
For the Society of Illustrators Student Scholarship Exhibition, a jury of professional peers, including illustrators and art directors, selected the most outstanding works created throughout the year. Pieces were accepted based on the quality of technique, concept and skill of medium used.
Scholarship awards are granted to approximately 25 students whose work is deemed the best of the best, according to the Society's website, which says it has awarded over $1.5 million to deserving students since the competition's inception in 1981.
The Society of Illustrators promotes the art of illustration and its history and evolving nature through exhibitions, lectures and education.
Art school bids farewell to Boston, furniture is donated
Olympia Snowe: The time is now to fix broken political system
Growing educational leadership at Jewish institutions
Professor Danielle Legros Georges named Boston's Poet Laureate
View all News
Ed. School Deans Join Forces to Bolster Teacher PreparationLesley Graduate School of Education Dean Jack Gillette is part of Deans for Impact, a new group of national education school leadersEducation WeekJanuary 26, 2015Former Maine senator Olympia Snowe speaks at Symphony HallDuring her appearance at Lesley's Boston Speakers Series, Snowe said that Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush are the least partisan potential presidential candidatesThe Boston GlobeJanuary 23, 2015
Florida Courier writer gets Guggenheim FellowshipPenny Dickerson, who holds an MFA in creative writing from Lesley, has received an H.F. Guggenheim reporting fellowshipFlorida CourierJanuary 22, 2015
Art Professor Chosen for Prestigious AwardStephanie Pierce, who holds a BFA from Lesley, has received a $25,000 Joan Mitchell Foundation artists grantUniversity of Arkansas NewswireJanuary 22, 2015


text: | Seanad Éireann - Volume 116 - 09 July, 1987 Adjournment Matter. - Austrian President's Vatican Visit. Mr. Norris Mr. Norris 2158 Mr. Norris: The matter I wish to raise on the Adjournment is the attendance of senior Irish diplomats, including the Irish Ambassador, at a reception on 25 June in the Vatican for President Waldheim of Austria. I attempted to raise this matter under Standing Order 29 on the morning of 25 June when there was a possibility that some intervention might take place by the Minister for Foreign Affairs requiring the ambassador not to attend, as happened in a number of other countries. You, a Chathaoirligh ruled that this was out of order, quite properly. I would like to express my gratitude to you for your courtesy in that ruling and for your assistance to me in finding a proper method of introducing this matter which I consider very important for discussion before the House so that the Minister, in this case the Minister, of State to whom [2158] I am very grateful for attending this evening, would have the opportunity to respond. At the outset I wish to say I have no intention whatever of attempting to criticise the Pope as a spiritual leader. He is one of the world's great spiritual leaders and it would be an impertinence for me to criticise him in any sense in that role. It would also be deeply offensive to the vast majority of Irish people. I should like it to be noted at the outset that there is no intention whatever on my part to deliver this kind of insult. However, the Pope is also a Head of State. He has a political role. He acts as a political figure and in this case there is no doubt whatever that his initiative or his reaction to proposals that emerged from Vienna was seen by the Austrian Government as a very direct and very clear political situation and it was responded to by the representatives of this country as a political situation. It is only with that dimension that I intend to deal. Had Dr. Waldheim intended merely to visit the Vatican on a pastoral quest, it would have caused no concern whatever that Pope John Paul II should hear his confession, but this was a different matter. This is a matter which clearly caused concern. I have here a scrapbook compiled, 14 pages long, every single page filled with reports in the Irish newspapers, first, heralding this proposed visit, giving quite clearly the reasons of the Austrian Government for so anxiously negotiating and seeking it, and then the reaction throughout the world to the advance publicity of that visit, the visit itself and the aftermath. It is very instructive, indeed, to look at this process. 2159 I note that shortly before the Waldheim visit was announced in a report in the Sunday Independent of 14 June 1987, it was stated that there was no intention that this country should invite President Waldheim to visit. I welcome that unofficial assurance and I trust that this evening the Minister will be able to copperfasten that assurance and reassure the Irish people that there will be no intention of inviting Dr. Waldheim to [2159] visit. There is no doubt that he is a highly controversial figure and that the invitation from the Vatican to visit Rome for an audience with the Pope effectively broke what has been referred to in every single newspaper in this country, and most of the newspapers throughout the world, as a blockade, an isolation of the Austrian President. It is not for me in this House to abuse the privileges of such an occasion by appearing to sit in judgment upon Dr. Waldheim, but it is worth reading into the record of the House the reasons why so many countries, including the European countries and the United States of America, felt it necessary either not to attend this reception at all or to instruct a junior diplomat to attend in place of the Ambassador. The reason is that while Dr. Waldheim has not as yet been found guilty, sufficient doubt has been raised so that the United States Justice Department has reason to believe that sufficient evidence exists that Dr. Waldheim may have assisted or otherwise participated in the persecution of persons because of race, religion, national origin or political opinion. Although a Head of State, he has been placed on a watch list of undesirable aliens whose entry into the United States of America shall be prohibited. The United States of America is not the only country which is clearly sensitive to this issue. 2160 I have before me also a report of the attitude of the Italian Government who were very clearly upset and dismayed by this invitation. The Italian Government made clear, in the days surrounding the Waldheim visit, their disapproval of the occasion by specifically not according to President Waldheim the courtesy of a call on their foreign ministry which is, as the Minister I am sure knows, a traditional conclusion of visits by foreign Heads of State to the Vatican. The Italian Government very clearly and very deliberately snubbed Dr. Waldheim and this, despite the fact that the Austrian Foreign Minister, Mr. Alois Mock announced to the press that the invitation of Dr. Waldheim was an exceptional gesture of the Holy [2160] Father to the President. It was, indeed, an exceptional gesture and I believe a most unfortunate one. If you look at the response immediately on the announcement — the headlines were: "Waldheim's Papal Trip Angers Jews," "Inquiry on Waldheim" — even the Austrian Government felt impelled by the international outcry, the outrage which is echoed here in page after page, to establish an inquiry into the bona fides, the standing of their own President under the chairmanship of a distinguished Swiss military historian, Hans Rudolf Kurtz. As the days built up, increasing doubts grew as to the suitability of the attendance by Irish diplomats at this particular reception for Dr. Waldheim. In a human way, it is very moving to read reports in the newspapers of the reaction of some of those who were most intimately concerned with this tragic period of European history. I quote from The Evening Press of 25 June, the evening after this audience, which said: The atmosphere was tense and one man whose parents spent time in a concentration camp yelled, "It is useless for the Pope to go to Auschwitz to cry for our dead and then receive this Nazi." That is the degree of feeling there was in Europe, in Rome, on that afternoon. That is the kind of feeling unleashed by this visit. I will quote again, this time from The Evening Press: Italian former concentration camp victims yelling shame, and waving posters bearing the names of Nazi death camps waited at the Vatican for Dr. Waldheim's arrival. Many of the protestors had concentration camp numbers tattooed on their arms. 2161 This is important because, alas, we cannot afford to forget the history of Europe, the tragic history of Europe, in which Austria played a particularly undistinguished role. It is because of the role of Austria as a country that I feel it particularly important that we should be sensitive to receptions for a President [2161] of Austria whose credibility has been so seriously called into question. I refer to a number of surveys that were carried out. For example, a survey of interviews conducted by the allied occupying forces between 1946 and February 1948 shows that only 42.6 per cent of respondents thought national socialism was a bad idea, and 38.1 per cent of Austrians, between 1946 and 1948, thought that national socialism was actually a good idea. There are even more worrying statistics, because I want to place the position of President Waldheim in a context in terms of his own country and its responsibilities. In 1973 another survey was conducted which asked Austrians if they should feel a special degree of responsibility towards the Jews: 67 per cent said no. In 1976, 83 per cent asked for an end to war crime trials. One wonders why they wished this process of justice to end. Perhaps the explanation comes with the infinitely worrying statistics. In 1982, 77 per cent of Austrians agreed either completely or partly with the statement that the Jews were to a certain degree themselves responsible for mass exterminations. I regret very much to have to tell the Minister that by 1986 this figure had actually gone up, not down. Sympathy for these appalling ideologies is not dying out; it is reawakening. In 1986, 43 per cent of a representative sample said Jews were not Austrians, and a staggering 79 per cent thought the Jews had been at least partly responsible for their own fate. 2162 It seems that there was occasion for us to be at least cautious in appearing to give approval to a Head of State who could be construed as representing this kind of unfortunate trend in European thought which I had hoped we might have put behind us at this stage. I again draw a distinction here between Dr. Waldheim as a man and Dr. Waldheim as a Head of State, because I noted with interest that Vatican officials drew this distinction and said they were not welcoming him as a man, they were welcoming him instead as a functionary of an institution or a State. I am attempting to close off that argument as well by saying that, until [2162] these doubts are resolved, a question mark still exists. I do not wish to pillory the Austrian people, their nation or their Government because I believe that we are all guilty in this. I remind the Minister that under the Constitution Ireland is defined as a Christian and democratic State. I sometimes wonder, when I hear this phrase so glibly trotted out on all sides in debate, what does it mean, that we are a Christian and democratic State? I speak as somebody who attempts to live as a Christian and to believe as a Christian. Does Christianity, as a result of this clause in the Constitution, inform the conduct of our daily affairs? Does it inform our foreign policy, for example, or are we, like so many other countries, merely mercenary, merely self seeking? Is there any international standard of morality at all? I sometimes wonder particularly in a case like the question of the audience of President Waldheim, what the Christian response would be in these circumstances, certainly to forgive the individual but not, I am sure, to appear even to condone the kinds of activities of which Dr. Waldheim has been accused. While, there is no secure proof of guilt, there is at least an acknowledgment that at the very minimum he falsified events in his own biography and did not tell the full truth about events that took place during the war. 2163 Lest I should be seen in what I have already said and what I intend to say further to be merely sensitive to the question of the Jewish problem, I should like to remind the House that the activities of which Dr. Waldheim stands accused and whose substance has been attested to by the activities and the response of the United States Justice Department were not only against the Jews but also against Yugoslavian and Greek patriots and partisans, so that any insult towards the Jewish people is also an insult towards the Yugoslavian and Greek Governments. We also must be aware of and sensitive to this problem. We are not isolated from it. We are not cut off. I noted the reply of the Minister, Deputy Lenihan, when questioned about the [2163] appropriateness of this. He replied with easy affableness that there was no problem, a phrase with which I understand his name is associated in the popular view—— Mr. Manning Mr. Manning Mr. Manning: He invented it. Mr. Norris Mr. Norris Mr. Norris: It was singularly inappropriate. We may comfort ourselves that we have little to regret on the question of the European Holocaust but we have because in the past we have been insensitive. I remember with great shame the visit of an otherwise extremely distinguished President of this country, Eamon de Valera, to the German Embassy at the end of the war to express condolence with the German ambassador on the death of Adolf Hitler. I remember also with the greatest regret that in 1943 a former Member of this House actually said — and it is on the record of this House — that Hitler had the right idea about the Jews and that we should learn something from him. None of us has our hands clean. It is a matter in which it behoves us all as human beings and as Christians to be extremely careful. If we look at the visit itself, it is notable that the newspaper reports emphasised the fact that — and I quote The Irish Times of 26 June: Ignoring world wide storm of Jewish protest. I make the point here that I do not believe the protest was exclusively Jewish; it was mounted by persons of conscience all over the world. — Pope John Paul II yesterday warmly welcomed President Kurt Waldheim of Austria to the Vatican for his first official visit abroad since he was elected a year ago. The man who until yesterday was being called "the prisoner of Vienna," because of the reluctance of most countries to receive him, was given the full diplomatic treatment down to the smallest detail of protocol. 2164 It was not just a formal visit. It was, [2164] most unfortunately, a red carpet. I feel strongly — and I know many Irish people feel strongly with me — that it was highly inappropriate for a diplomat of the status of ambassador to be present at this controversial visit. Of course, as a spiritual leader it is perfectly appropriate for the Pope to mix with persons of doubtful reputation. After all the founder of the religion, Jesus Christ, did that as a matter of principle and the present Pope has been remarkably generous in the inclusion of this kind of person in his circle. One remembers also, regrettably, the figure of Archbishop Markincus in this. However, it is of course appropriate for a great spiritual leader to be charitable, but charity of this kind is the province of spiritual leaders. We must be aware of the political repercussions of our action. I must ask the Minister whether it was not surely more appropriate to take the line that other European countries did in either instructing their ambassador to be absent, or that the country should be represented by a less senior diplomat. I note that this was done by many countries, including the United States and Italy. The Minister will have a full list of those countries who took this action. I very much wish that this action had been taken. I would like the Minister to inform the House why the decision was taken that the ambassador should go. Who took it? Was there a specific reason? Was it intended to reinforce Dr. Waldheim or, as a political decision, was it intended to release this discredited figure once more on to the international stage? If it was I reiterate my belief that it was a great mistake. I look at the aftermath and at 27 June where, in the light of the fact that the Pope intends to make a visit over the next year to the United States of America, all the leading Jewish groups in the United States have decided to boycott that visit which is most unfortunate and regrettable in a situation where perhaps the Pope might have used his influence diplomatically to relieve some of the tensions in the Middle East. 2165 I note that even in Dr. Waldheim's own country of Austria the response on [2165] behalf of the Socialist Party was to ask him to resign. Most worrying of all, look at the flurry of invitations that were subsequently received and where they came from. Almost immediately an announcement was made in the press that Dr. Waldheim was to visit Iran, the country that after the demise of the Nazi regime in Europe has the single most bloody record in abuse of human rights. There is not time for me to read the shameful category of their atrocities into the record. Anybody who wishes it may purchase the briefing document on Iran by Amnesty International. What is the response of this Government? We have an Iranian Embassy here which has recently been expanded. We have also got an office of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, which I welcome. They continually send me briefing documents. I do not wish to open up too controversial an area, but it is noticeable that the Vatican has no diplomatic representation from Israel and that Ireland is the only European Community country that does not have an exchange of ambassadors. This I know is a delicate area but I urge the Minister to take into account this very important fact in a situation where the Waldheim visit came up. It is most important although I will not go into great detail because there is no time and it might be indelicate. I urge the Minister to consider this question of the establishment of proper and full diplomatic relations between this country and the State of Israel. I look forward to his reply in the matter of the diplomatic representation of this country at this most regrettable reception of a Head of State. Minister of State at the Department of Industry and Commerce (Mr. S. Brennan) Minister of State at the Department of Industry and Commerce (Mr. S. Brennan) 2166 Minister of State at the Department of Industry and Commerce (Mr. S. Brennan): I will start by thanking Senator Norris for his extremely articulate contribution. The Government's position is that Ireland maintains good and friendly relations with Austria as a State and will continue to do so. President Waldheim is the democratically elected Austrian Head of State. Our Ambassador in Vienna has presented credentials to President Waldheim. The reception [2166] offered by the Vatican to enable ambassadors accredited to the Holy See to meet President Waldheim on the occasion of his visit to the Vatican on 25 June was in accordance with normal diplomatic protocol. Similarly, in attending the reception, the Irish Ambassador was following normal diplomatic protocol. I should point out that he was one of a large number of ambassadors representing democratic States in doing this. The Senator mentioned the question of the invitation to which I should respond. In the course of his State visit to Austria last year President Hillery, in accordance with the diplomatic courtesies, normally extended between visiting Heads of State, extended to his host, who was then the Austrian President, Dr. Kirchschlaeger, an invitation to visit Ireland. The then President, that is, Dr. Kirchschlaeger, made a private visit to Ireland in March 1987. I want to inform the House that there are no plans for an official visit to Ireland by President Waldheim. I should also point out that in these matters of invitations between Heads of State, quite a number of these protocol invitations never materialise; some of them do but quite a number do not. The Pope, as the Senator said, is also a Head of State. His invitation to President Waldheim obviously was an invitation to another Head of State. It just struck me, as the Senator spoke, that Austria did not exist, as such, as a State during the period of Nazi outrages involving that country. Indeed, it was one of the first States to be swallowed up by the Hitler regime. It is a State that was established anew after the war. It is a member of the community of democratic States with which Ireland and all other democratic States have maintained diplomatic relations for many decades. 2167 I must say, in the strongest possible way, that the Government, like Senator Norris, will not engage in pillorying the Austrian nation, its people or their State. It is for that reason that Ireland maintains good and friendly relations with Austria and will continue to do so. I should also [2167] stress to the House that the formal institution of the State must deal with formal and legal structures and legal institutions as it finds them. It does not have the luxury of dealing with these matters on an individual, personal or emotional level. We must deal with them in a formal, structured way. We must deal with the institutions as they present themselves to the House. 2168 [2168] There are no plans for an official visit to Ireland by President Waldheim. Ireland will continue to maintain good and friendly relations with Austria. I look forward to us continuing on that line. The Seanad adjourned at 6.45 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 14 July 1987. Seanad Éireann 116 Adjournment Matter. Austrian President's Vatican Visit. General Debate 19870709 | ||||||||||||||||||||||


text:
Bears prove they're Golden, defeat Aliso Niguel 5-3 to Win CIF ChampionshipWolverines can't recover from Temecula Valley's 4 run first inningSaturday, June 7th, 2014 Issue 23, Volume 18.
Dodger Stadium, one of the most well known Big League stadiums in Southern California, played host on Friday night, June 6, to the CIF Southern Section Championships once again this year, and though it's every little kids dream to play ball in a big league ballpark, it seemed all too familiar for the Golden Bears from Temecula Valley High School. Almost one year ago to the day the Bears found themselves in the exact same position, playing in the final game of the CIF-SS Division 2 Championships. In fact, Temecula Valley has been here two other times as well, in 1992 and again in 2005, but never have they brought home a championship. "Tonight we knew it was going to be different, tonight we came here to win and that's what we set out to do, since day one," said Tony Nobienski, Temecula Valleys head coach. Last year the Bears showed up to Dodger Stadium without their bats and dropped the Championship game to Cypress, 5-0. "It wasn't a fluke that this team got here last year and we obviously proved that by making it here again this year," said Nobienski, who also admits there was never a doubt in his mind about the strength of this year's team, which was almost the exact replica of the squad from last year. Temecula Valley was senior heavy this year, returning 17 seniors in all to the 2013/14 squad that played in what MaxPreps recently posted as "the strongest league in the nation" - the Southwestern League. The Golden Bears were the runner ups this year in league, finishing 9-6 just behind Southwestern League Champions Great Oak, who were 23-7 overall and 11-4 in league. The Wolfpack squad was hoping to meet up with their rivals from down the street during this playoff run, which would have been the fifth time they played each other this season. Both teams met up early on in the pre-season during the championship game of the Pirate/Falcon Tournament, and then again three times during league, all of which would see Great Oak overpower their cross town rivals every time. "They (Great Oak) are a great team and were on a good run through the playoffs, as were we," said Nobienski, "but when we saw that Aliso Niguel knocked them off last week, we knew that we could potentially be playing that team if we got past Valencia." Aliso Niguel, 23-9 overall and 9-3 in league, were also the runner ups in their Sea View League and were making their second finals appearance in the school's history after defeating La Mirada in the semi-finals 8-0. In 2012, the Wolverines lost 3-2 to Pacifica of Garden Grove and had been rumored as the team to beat this year, especially with their ace who would just happen to be going against Temecula Valley, future UCLA Bruin Kyle Molnar. Temecula Valley would get their first ups as the visiting team and would go to work early against Molnar, doing what the Bears did best all season by jumping out to an early lead, in this case a four run lead, capitalizing on two crucial errors that were made at first base. David Maldonado, who will be playing next year at SDSU, led off the game with a single up the middle and then the hit fest began with the entire Bears lineup stepping up to the plate in the first inning. Seniors Aj Sawyer, Samari Buchanan and Alec Garrett would all deliver on RBI base hits to give the Golden Bears some insurance to start the game. On the mound for Temecula Valley was Brandon Koch, a UCR committee who had an 8-1 record this season with a 0.73 ERA in almost 58 innings pitched with 50 strikeouts recorded in the books to lead the way for the Bears. Koch would make quick work of the bottom half of the first inning striking out lead off batter Domenic Colacchio, but got a little shaky giving up a first pitch single to Justin Fowler, then beamed sophomore Blake Sabol before getting pitcher and clean up hitter Kyle Molnar to ground out leading to first baseman Eric Wagaman popping out to Mitch Kemp who made a great play going over the rail in foul territory on the third base side to make the grab. The Golden Bears slowed down a bit offensively as the game progressed while Aliso Niguel players, Blake Sabol and team captain Anthony Sommer would try everything they could to get the Wolverines back in the fight. Sabol would have three hits overall on the day with two stolen bases but it was Sommer that delivered on a double that led to center fielder Remy Wasserbac driving him in for an early run in the second inning. Temecula Valley would keep their three run lead through four innings until things started to get a little hairy for the Bears. A walk to the Wolverines right fielder Mitchell Brady would lead to a controversial call at first base that went the way of the Bears on a sacrifice bunt by Wasserbach, where he was called out on a very close play. This brought up Colacchio again who hit a line drive to the right field gap plating Brady making the score 4-2. The score would remain 4-2 through the seventh inning, but that's not to say that great plays weren't being made by both teams, especially a potential inning saving catch on the run by Jordan Gardner in the outfield and a clutch throw out by Nick Juhl from behind the plate, both of which were made in the fifth inning as the Wolverines were looking to rally. David Maldonado would once again come to the plate and deliver on a clutch base hit, this time in the seventh inning with a double that went off the wall in left field on the fly. Maldonado would get pinch run for junior Matt Poladian as he came up holding his hamstring after rounding first base. A balk by Molnar would send Poladian to third base and a hard hit base hit up the middle by Kyle Plantier would bring home a much needed insurance run going into the bottom of the seventh. Aliso Niguel tried to take advantage of a pitching change that brought in senior reliever Jared Morton to the hill and though he started off rocky by hitting a batter after getting a first out ground out, it was an error at second base by Plantier that would put two runners on base, sending some worry to the visiting crowd. A base hit by Sabol (his third on the day) would load up the bases for the Wolverine's as pitcher Kyle Molnar stepped in to hit a sacrifice fly to the outfield scoring their third run. With the fan levels raising on both sides of the stadium, Morton would strike out Aliso Niguel's Eric Wagaman to end the game at 5-3, sending the Temecula crowd into a frenzy filled with relief as the Bears picked up their first ever CIF Championship win. "I'm very proud of everyone involved with our baseball program, especially our players. They really locked in on what needed to be done on both sides of the plate in order to bring home this win!" exclaimed Nobienski. 0 comments Be the first to share your opinion on this article!
The Valley News has tightened its' policy regarding comments. While we invite you to contribute your opinions and thoughts, we request that you refrain from using vulgar or obscene words and post only comments that directly pertain to the specific topic of the story or article. Comments that are derogatory in nature have a high likelihood for editing or non-approval if they carry the possibility of being libelous. The comment system is not intended as a forum for individuals or groups to air personal grievances against other individuals or groups. Please, no advertising or trolling. In posting a comment for consideration, users understand that their posts may be edited as necessary to meet system parameters, or the post may not be approved at all. By submitting a comment, you agree to all the rules and guidelines described here. Most comments are approved or disregarded within one business day. |
The Village NewsAnza Valley OutlookFallbrook.orgSourcebookPDF VersionCoupon CornerSign up for iNewsEarthquake Info Most Commented 359 Medical marijuan... 267 Arrests now numb... 175 Authorities seek... 168 Man hit, killed ... 125 Mother-in-law ar... 122 Camp Pendleton a... 122 Bikers steering ... 121 Authorities dist... 118 22 suspected ill... 117 Double fatality ... 114 Murrieta Mayor A... 114 Temecula mosque ... 110 Governor Brown s... 107 Bonsall man (lon... 105 U.S. Marine corp... |
The Valley News All contents copyright ©2015 |
About Us Earthquake Information Business Listings |
Contact Us Letter to the Editor Report a website error |
Sitemap Online Digital Edition RSS Feeds Login |