Posted onDecember 31, 2025|Comments Off on Why Do You Really Want to Get More Done?
It’s been months since I posted on The Incrementalist YouTube channel or podcast. In 2025, I focused on other areas of life that changed how I view personal productivity – not so much around the how, but more about the why.
To know whether to continue, start or stop any project, you must know the WHY before the HOW.
I’ve reflected on how I can apply what I’ve learned to The Incrementalist, which is still about making big changes in small steps. You might notice some differences in episodes to come. Or I might just start a new channel. If you’ve been following the show, I hope you will stick around. If you’re new, welcome and stay a while.
Module 2 is now up. It contains 16 minutes of 5 video lessons:
1) What is the Busyness Trap?
2) How Do You Know You’re in the Busyness Trap?
3) The Psychology of Busyness
4) The Culture of Busyness
5) The Business of Busyness
The enrollment fee could go up as more modules are added incrementally. For updates on the course, subscribe to the e-newsletter or to The Incrementalist YouTube channel or podcast.
Dyan Williams is a solo lawyer who practices U.S. immigration law and legal ethics at Dyan Williams Law PLLC. She is also a productivity coach who helps busy professionals and business owners reduce overwhelm, turn their ideas into action, and focus on what matters. She is the author of The Incrementalist: A Simple Productivity System to Create Big Results in Small Steps.
Posted onDecember 13, 2025|Comments Off on USCIS Rescinds INA 204(c) Charge + U.S. Consulate Vacates INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) Finding in K-1 Fiancé Visa Case= A True Success Story
USCIS approved the Form I-129F K-1 fiancé petition of our U.S. citizen client, after issuing a Notice of Intent to Deny it under INA 204(c). In the NOID, USCIS claimed her foreign national fiancé entered a prior sham marriage to a Form I-485 green card applicant solely to gain permanent residence as a derivative beneficiary.
As counsel, we filed a Response to the NOID, with documentary evidence and legal argument demonstrating the prior marriage was real but ended because the parties grew apart. Eight months later, USCIS issued a Form I-797, Approval Notice for the I-129F petition, which cleared the way for the beneficiary to apply for the K-1 visa.
When the K-1 applicant appeared for his visa interview, however, the U.S. Consulate issued a refusal notice under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) (fraud or willful misrepresentation of material facts to obtain U.S. immigration benefits). It had concerns over the prior marriage, even though USCIS had already resolved this issue in the applicant’s favor.
As counsel, we submitted a Motion to Reconsider and Rescind the section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) Inadmissibility Finding, with documentary evidence and legal argument showing the K-1 visa applicant had never used fraud or willful misrepresentation of material facts in any applications to receive U.S. immigration benefits. We further pointed out the (6)(C)(i) finding conflicted with USCIS’ approval of the Form I-129F petition, after it dropped the 204(c) charge.
One week later, the U.S. Consulate issued an email granting the Motion and provided further instructions for the applicant to collect his K-1 visa.
USCIS Charges Beneficiary with INA 204(c)/Marriage Fraud Bar in Form I-129F Petition
Section 204(c) of the Immigration & Nationality Act prohibits USCIS from approving a visa petition (e.g. Form I-129F or I-130) if the beneficiary attempted or conspired to enter a marriage for the purpose of evading U.S. immigration laws. If there is substantial and probative evidence of such an attempt or conspiracy in the beneficiary’s file – regardless of whether the benefit was received – USCIS will deny the petition under 204(c).
In its Notice of Intent to Deny our client’s Form I-129F petition, USCIS claimed it was apparent the beneficiary entered a prior sham marriage to a Form I-485 green card applicant for the sole purpose of circumventing immigration laws. USCIS determined that, as such, it was prohibited from approving the petition under 204(c).
The NOID marked the first opportunity to respond to the allegations of a prior sham marriage. In its earlier Request for Evidence (RFE), USCIS had asked only for proof of a real relationship and engagement between the couple. There was no mention of the 204(c) bar. The petitioner responded to the RFE on her own and then USCIS took several months to issue the NOID on section 204(c) grounds.
USCIS Vacates INA 204(c) Charge and Approves Form I-129F Petition Based on NOID Response
The petitioner and beneficiary next contacted Dyan Williams Law for representation in addressing the NOID. Within 30 days, we filed a timely and persuasive Response to the NOID, which contained credible testimonies, objective evidence and legal argument establishing the beneficiary and his prior spouse entered a valid, good-faith marriage, before it ended due to unresolved differences.
After receiving the Response, USCIS agreed there was no substantial and probative evidence to sustain the 204(c) finding and approved the Form I-29F petition. The parties then consulted with Dyan Williams Law to complete the K-1 visa application at the U.S. Consulate.
U.S. Consulate Issues K-1 Visa Refusal Notice under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i)
To find that a visa applicant is inadmissible or ineligible for a visa under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i), the consular officer must find all of the following elements are met:
The applicant made a false representation;
The false representation was willfully made;
The fact misrepresented is material;
The false representation was made to a U.S. government official, such as a consular officer; and
The applicant, by using fraud or misrepresentation, seeks to procure, sought to procure, procured, a benefit under U.S. immigration laws, such as a visa or admission into the United States.
When the beneficiary appeared for his interview at the U.S. Consulate, we expected his K-1 visa to be granted because USCIS had approved the Form I-129F petition and thus found there was no substantial and probative evidence of a prior sham marriage. He was stunned when, at the end of the interview, the U.S. Consulate issued a K-1 visa refusal notice citing to “6C1.” At the visa interview, the U.S. consular officer merely stated it was based on the prior marriage.
U.S. Consulate Rescinds INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) Inadmissibility Finding and Grants K-1 FiancéVisaBased on Motion to Reconsider
The petitioner and beneficiary next contacted Dyan Williams Law for representation in overcoming the (6)(C)(i) inadmissibility finding. We discussed the option of filing a Form I-601 waiver of inadmissibility with USCIS, which would involve a long processing time and the high evidentiary burden of proving the petitioner would face “extreme hardship” if the beneficiary was denied admission to the United States. Ultimately, with recommendation from counsel, they decided to instead pursue a Motion to Reconsider with the U.S. Consulate.
With a more flexible filing timeframe, we took several months to gather the necessary documentary evidence and written testimonies, including a declaration from the prior spouse confirming her marriage to the beneficiary was bona fide. Within a year of the visa refusal notice, we submitted the Motion to Reconsider and Rescind Inadmissibility Finding to the U.S. Consulate. In counsel’s legal memorandum, we explained the facts and laws to support the lifting of the (6)(C)(i) bar.
The Form I-129F approval did not necessarily mean the elements of fraud or willful misrepresentation were not met, but only that USCIS did not have substantial and probative of a prior sham marriage. Thankfully, it did not take long for the U.S. Consulate to make a positive decision.
Ten days later, the U.S. Consulate sent an email notice stating it removed the (6)(C)(i) bar and provided further instructions for the K-1 visa process. The applicant completed the next steps and, three months later, received the visa for lawful admission to the U.S. in K-1 status.
USCIS Approves Form I-485 Application for Permanent Residence
Within 90 days of the K-1 visa holder’s arrival in the United States, he and his U.S. citizen fiancée married and began their life together. They then contacted Dyan Williams Law to represent them in the Form I-485 green card application process.
Less than three months after USCIS received the Form I-485 application, they appeared for their scheduled Adjustment of Status interview before USCIS. The application was readily approved on the spot, with no doubts from USCIS regarding the beneficiary’s prior marriage or his existing marriage to the petitioner. The USCIS officer said they had great documentary evidence for an approval and did not ask about the NOID, the (6)(C)(i) visa refusal notice, or their relationship.
USCIS granted a two-year conditional green card because the marriage was less than two years old at the time it approved the Form I-485 application. The beneficiary will need to file a Form I-751 petition to remove the condition on his residence and to keep his U.S. immigration status. He may also file for naturalization (U.S. citizenship) when he meets the continuous residence requirement and other eligibility criteria.
It took 6 years for the beneficiary to receive his permanent residence from the time the U.S. citizen filed the Form I-129F petition with USCIS. This long and complicated U.S. immigration journey is a true success story for the clients and Dyan Williams Law.
# # # The Legal Immigrant provides general information only from Dyan Williams Law. It is based on U.S. immigration laws, regulations and policies that are subject to change. Do not consider it as legal advice. The sharing or receipt of this information does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Posted onSeptember 22, 2025|Comments Off on Trump’s $100,000 Fee in New H-1B Petitions: What We Know (So Far)
On September 19, President Trump signed a Proclamation restricting the entry of certain H-1B workers into the United States, unless the Form I-129 (H-1B) petition was accompanied by a $100,000 fee from the employer. The restriction is effective as of September 21, and will expire in 12 months, absent an extension from the Trump Administration.
Tech giants like Microsoft, Amazon and JPMorgan immediately advised their H-1B workers to remain in the U.S. until further guidelines are provided by the Administration. But the impact of the Proclamation, titled Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers, is not as dire as many news media reports and social media posts initially reported.
This major shift in H-1B policy adds a $100,000 payment to the existing filing fees and attorney fees related to Form I-129 petitions. Whether it will encourage U.S. employers to hire U.S. workers or relocate jobs to offshore workforces is uncertain.
To reduce panic, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt posted on X on September 20, “This is NOT an annual, fee, but a one-time fee that applies only to the petition.” She added, “Those who already hold H-1B visas and are currently outside of the country right now will NOT be charged $100,000 to re-enter.” She further wrote, “This applies only to new visas, not renewals, and not current visa holders.”
The White House has since clarified that the fee is required for new H-1B petitions submitted after 12:01 a.m. ET Sunday, September 20, not just those in the 2026 H-1B annual lottery.
A USCIS Memorandum, dated September 20, 2025, confirms the Proclamation applies prospectively to new H-1B petitions filed on September 21 or later, including future H-1B cap petitions or petitions requesting consular processing.
The Memorandum clarifies that it does NOT apply to applicants who:
1. are the beneficiaries of pending H-1B petitions that were filed prior to September 21, 2025;
2. are the beneficiaries of currently approved H-1B petitions; or
3. already have valid, unexpired H-1B visas.
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued guidance stating the Presidential Proclamation does not restrict the entry of current H-1B visa holders. H-1B employees with valid Form I-797 Approval Notices and H-1B visas may travel as normal and will not be subject to the fee requirement to re-enter the United States.
What Are the Requirements and Effects of the Proclamation?
The Proclamation states in Section 1:
“(a) Pursuant to sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), the entry into the United States of aliens as nonimmigrants to perform services in a specialty occupation under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), is restricted, except for those aliens whose petitions are accompanied or supplemented by a payment of $100,000 — subject to the exceptions set forth in subsection (c) of this section. This restriction shall expire, absent extension, 12 months after the effective date of this proclamation, which shall be 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025.
(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall restrict decisions on petitions not accompanied by a $100,000 payment for H-1B specialty occupation workers under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, who are currently outside the United States, for 12 months following the effective date of this proclamation as set forth in subsection (a) of this section. The Secretary of State shall also issue guidance, as necessary and to the extent permitted by law, to prevent misuse of B visas by alien beneficiaries of approved H-1B petitions that have an employment start date beginning prior to October 1, 2026.
(c) The restriction imposed pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall not apply to any individual alien, all aliens working for a company, or all aliens working in an industry, if the Secretary of Homeland Security determines, in the Secretary’s discretion, that the hiring of such aliens to be employed as H-1B specialty occupation workers is in the national interest and does not pose a threat to the security or welfare of the United States.”
In short, the Proclamation:
(1) Restricts entry of H-1B nonimmigrants to the U.S. unless the H-1B (Form I-129) petition to USCIS is accompanied by a $100,000 payment.
(2) Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to restrict approvals of petitions for H-1B workers who are currently outside the United States, if the petition is not accompanied by the $100,000 payment.
(3) Allows case-by-case exemptions if the Secretary of Homeland Security, in the Secretary’s discretion, determines the hiring of the H-1B worker is in the national interest and will not pose a threat to the security or welfare of the United States.
The Proclamation further requires the following:
(a) The employers shall, prior to filing an H-1B petition for a worker outside the United States, obtain and retain documentation showing the $100,000 payment was made.
(b) The Secretary of State shall verify receipt of payment during the H-1B petition process and shall approve only those petitions for which the employer has made the payment.
(c) The Department of Homeland Security and the Department of States shall deny entry to any H-1B nonimmigrant for whom the employer has not made the payment and take all other necessary and appropriate action to implement the proclamation.
(d) No later than 30 days following the completion of the H-1B lottery that occurs after the proclamation, the Department of State, the Department of Labor, the Department of Homeland Security and the Attorney General shall make a recommendation on whether to extend the restriction in the interests of the United States.
(e) The Secretary of Labor shall initiate rulemaking to revise the prevailing wage levels for the H-1B program.
(f) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall initiate rulemaking to prioritize high-skilled and high-paid H-1B workers.
Why Did the Trump Administration Impose the $100,000 Fee?
The Administration says the H-1B program was created to bring temporary workers into the United States to perform additive, high-skilled functions, but it has been used to replace, rather than supplement, American workers with lower-paid, lower-skilled labor. They note the H-1B program largely displaces U.S. workers and suppresses wages because foreign nationals are more willing to work for lower pay.
The Proclamation states that information technology (IT) firms, in particular, have abused the H-1B program, which significantly harms American workers in computer-related fields. On average, the share of IT workers in the H-1B program grew from 32% in fiscal year 2003 to an average of over 65% in the last 5 fiscal years.
The Proclamation also notes that abuse of the H-1 B program is a national security threat. H-1B reliant outsourcing companies have been found to engage in visa fraud, conspiracy to launder money, conspiracy under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and other illegal activities to recruit foreign workers to the U.S.
H-1B workers must have at least a bachelor’s degree in the relevant field of study to fill a position in a specialty occupation requiring certain knowledge, skills and educational credentials. But the H-1B employer is not required to recruit U.S. workers, unless it is found to be H-1B dependent or a previous willful violator of H-1B requirements.
According to the White House, the restrictions will curb abuse of the H-1B program while allowing employers to hire the best of the best H-1B workers. It is not clear how the change will be implemented or whether it will be subject to legal challenge in federal courts. In the meantime, employers and foreign national workers may consider other visa options, such as the O-1 (Individuals with Extraordinary Ability or Achievement), L-1 (Intracompany Transferee) or TN (Canadian and Mexican citizens in specific professional occupations).
# # # The Legal Immigrant provides general information only from Dyan Williams Law. It is based on U.S. immigration laws, regulations and policies that are subject to change. Do not consider it as legal advice. The sharing or receipt of this information does not create an attorney-client relationship.
For an early enrollment fee of $29, you will get unlimited access to Module 1 plus all new modules that are added incrementally.
The price of this course will increase as more modules are published. When all the modules are made available, the enrollment fee could be from $99 to $199.
By taking this course, you will learn why you fall into the busyness trap, what keeps you stuck there, and how to get out and stay out.
Module 1 contains 12 minutes of 5 video lessons:
1) Welcome (or what to expect in this course) 2) Productivity Principles to Beat Busyness 3) Fast Changes and Tech Overuse Make You Busier 4) Small Steps to Giant Leaps 5) No Quick Fixes or One-Size-Fits-All Solutions
Lessons may be updated or added to provide more value and to address common questions and constructive feedback. For updates on the course, subscribe to the enewsletter or to The Incrementalist YouTube channel or podcast.
To listen to the podcast, click here. To watch the video, click here.
# # #
Dyan Williams is a solo lawyer who practices U.S. immigration law and legal ethics at Dyan Williams Law PLLC. She is also a productivity coach who helps busy professionals and business owners reduce overwhelm, turn their ideas into action, and focus on what matters. She is the author of The Incrementalist: A Simple Productivity System to Create Big Results in Small Steps.
Posted onApril 17, 2025|Comments Off on Why the Law of Attraction is Unproductive and (Even) Harmful
The Law of Attraction says your thoughts and feelings manifest your reality; they contain vibrations and frequencies that create tangible outcomes or visible results. It’s pseudoscience that makes vague references to neurology, metaphysics and quantum mechanics.
The Law of Attraction is a New Thought or New Age concept. The idea is that whatever you desire, the universe will provide. The 3 steps of manifestation are to ask, belief and receive. There is no action step.
When you’re in the realm of possibility, action typically beats inaction. You could break down the challenge to make the action steps easier, struggle less, and apply the effort that you can reasonably manage. The incrementalist approach is more doable than trying to harness your mind power to manifest desired outcomes.
In episode 71 of The Incrementalist, you will learn 7 reasons why the Law of Attraction is unproductive and even harmful.
P.S. I’m making an online course titled The Busyness Trap: Escape Overload and Focus on What Matters. To get updates on the course launch and registration process, subscribe to my e-newsletter or The IncrementalistYouTube channel or podcast.
# # #
Dyan Williams is a productivity coach who helps busy professionals and business owners reduce overwhelm, turn their ideas into action, and focus on what matters. She is also a solo lawyer who practices U.S. immigration law and legal ethics at Dyan Williams Law PLLC. She is the author of The Incrementalist: A Simple Productivity System to Create Big Results in Small Steps.
