60-Day Comment Response Matrix

T-Rule_60dayCommentMatrix.pdf

Application for T Nonimmigrant Status; Application for Immediate Family Member of T-1 Recipient; & Declaration of Law Enforcement Officer for Victim of Trafficking in Persons

60-Day Comment Response Matrix

OMB: 1615-0099

Document [pdf]

Download: pdf | pdf

Commenter
ID
USCIS-20110010-0104

Comment

General Opinion

1.1

USCIS-20110010-0103

Comment: Trafficking is largely ignored and
fraught with issues including lack of witness
statements. Trafficking victims often frequently
abscond or move back with their trafficker or retain
contact with coyotes via Facebook / WhatsApp. As
such, trafficking victim should not change
immigrant status.
Commenter: Ana De Melo Ferreira

Appreciation
3.

Introduction/
Conclusion
Appreciation

USCIS Response

Commenter: WhoPoo App
USCIS-2011-0010-0
104.pdf

Response: The commenter expressed an opinion on
immigration issues generally. USCIS is making no changes to
the form or instructions as a result of this comment.

USCIS-2011-0010-0
103.pdf

2.1
USCIS-20110010-0105

Comment: Thank you for sharing this
Commenter: Carson Osberg

3.1

Comment: I am an attorney and have practiced
immigration law or advised on immigration law
matters for over ten years, working primarily on
humanitarian remedies, including VAWA, T, & Urelated matters. I am also currently Chair of AILA’s
VAWA/U/T National Liaison Committee. I am
writing in my personal capacity in response to the
Paperwork Reduction Act portion of the T visa final
rule, Classification for Victims of Severe Forms of
Trafficking In Persons; Eligibility for “T”
Nonimmigrant Status, DHS Docket No. USCIS2011-0010, which has a comment deadline of July
1, 2024.

Response: Thank you for your comment.
USCIS-2011-0010-0
105_attachment_1.pdf

Response: Thank you for your comment.

T Final Rule Form Revision Responses to 60-day FRN Public Comments
Public Comments (regulations.gov): USCIS-2011-0010-0082
60-day FRN Citation (federalregister.gov): 89 FR 34864
Publish Dates: April 30, 2024 – July 1, 2024
Commenters: 3
I have reviewed the proposed versions of Forms I914, I-914A, I-914B, and I-765, along with their
accompanying instructions, as posted in connection
with the T visa final rule. I write to suggest the
following changes to those documents with a goal of
enhancing the quality and clarity of the information
collected and also of minimizing the burden on
those completing the forms. These suggestions are
informed by my own experience representing
survivors of trafficking and also reflect the concerns
expressed to me by legal practitioners.

Form I-914 (8/1/24
edition)
Form I-914

3.2

Form I-914

3.4

3.3

…
I appreciate the opportunity to comment on these
proposed form changes. Thank you for your
consideration.
Comment: Page 1, Part 2: The Attorney State
License Bar Number field does not allow numbers.
Comment: Page 2, Part 2, Question 8: I appreciate
USCIS’s addition of “Another Gender Identity,”
which is more inclusive and representative, but
suggest a minor revision of the form here due to
what I believe is an inadvertent error. The form
currently allows selection of “Male” or “Female”
AND “Another Gender Identity” simultaneously,
but the draft instructions seem to indicate only one
should be selected, as only “M,” “F,” or “X” will
appear on a nonimmigrant’s documents.
Comment: Page 3, Part 3, Questions 6 & 7: These
questions are duplicative of questions 2A & 2B and
are also separated by questions involving physical
presence and extreme hardship. I would recommend
reorganizing these questions and condensing them
so there are not repetitive or partially duplicative

Response: USCIS will update the document functionality.
Response: The applicant should select one box. USCIS will
update the document functionality.

Response: USCIS agrees that there is redundancy in some of
the questions throughout the form. As suggested, USCIS will
review the entire form for improvements in a future revision
action.

Form I-914

3.5

Form I-914

3.6

Form I-914

3.7

questions, which causes confusion and
unnecessarily complicates the form.
Comment: Page 3, Part 3, Question 9: This
question could be clarified by including a “N/A”
option for those who have only entered the U.S.
once and asking the question about the “most recent
entry” only of those who have entered more than
once.
Comment: Page 3, Part 3, Question 10: Now that
there is a BFD process that does require an I-765,
this question would be clearer if written as follows:
“I am requesting an Employment Authorization
Document (EAD) when my I-914 is granted” (or
…”when I am granted T nonimmigrant status”).
Comment:
Page 4, Part 4 [text at the top of the page requiring
disclosure of all criminal history]: I recommend
including a note stating that vacated crimes meeting
the standards put forth in Pickering & Azrag—
crimes that have been vacated due to a substantive,
statutory, or procedural defect—do not need to be
listed on Form I-914. Many trafficking survivors are
forced or coerced into committing crimes as part of
their victimization, and state legislatures are
increasingly acknowledging forced criminality by
enacting vacatur legislation to allow the vacatur of
criminal acts for trafficking victims, voiding the
earlier judgment. In recognition of the legal error,
vacatur also leads to the destruction of the related
criminal records. For instance, in California, under
Cal. Penal Code § 236.14(k), government agencies
are required to seal and destroy such records and
there is often no recourse to obtain a copy from the
court. I think it is misleading to indicate, whether
explicitly or by omission, that an individual with a

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Response: USCIS agrees with the suggested edit and has made
the change.

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Form I-914

3.8

Form I-914

3.9

Form I-914

3.10

Form I-914A

3.11

record validly vacated for immigration purposes due
to legal defect must still disclose that criminal
history—in contravention of vacatur statutes,
judicial orders, and the purpose behind those
statutes, which is to enhance justice and prevent
legally erroneous convictions from continuing to
adversely impact an individual—and recommend
that USCIS reconsider revising its language here.
Comment:
Page 5, Part 4, Question 3D & 4B4: I suggest
revising to “one or more individuals” (plural) as
more grammatically correct and in line with
common usage.
Comment:
Page 7, Part 5 “Information About Your Family
Members”: I suggest including here or in the
instructions that the applicant’s spouse and all
children should be included on the form, regardless
of whether an I-914A is being or will be filed for
them, as this is commonly misunderstood by
applicants.
Comment:
Page 9, Part 7, Interpreter’s Contact Information: I
suggest including a note indicating where applicants
can provide information about additional
interpreters used. In cases involving rarer languages,
multiple interpreters may be required, such as for
interpretation from English to Spanish to an
indigenous language and vice versa. I recommend
either allocating space for an additional interpreter
or providing guidance on what to include in the
"Additional Information" section.
Comment:

Response: USCIS agrees with the suggested edit and has made
the change.

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Response: USCIS will update the document functionality.

Form I-914A

3.12

Form I-914A

3.13

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.14

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.15

Page 1, Part 3, #3: When completing the T-1’s A#
here, the derivative A# field on page 2 autopopulates. I suggest correcting this form error.
Comment:
Page 10, Part 6, Interpreter’s Contact Information: I
suggest including a note indicating where applicants
can provide information about additional
interpreters. In cases involving rarer languages,
multiple interpreters may be required, such as for
interpretation from English to Spanish to an
indigenous language, and vice versa. I recommend
either allocating space for an additional interpreter
or providing guidance on what to include in the
"Additional Information" section.
Comment:
Page 11, Part 7 (Preparer’s Mailing Address), #3:
The field allows no space between the street number
and street name.
Comment:
General: I recommend referencing the USCIS
Policy Manual for pro se individuals who are
unlikely to be aware of existing guidance regarding
T nonimmigrant status. The Policy Manual provides
critical context unavailable in these instructions.
Failing to reference the Policy Manual is
gatekeeping critical information from pro se
survivors and is an accessibility issue.
Comment:
General: I also suggest providing a link to OVCfunded legal service providers so that unrepresented
individuals—or individuals who lose access to
counsel during the pendency of their application,
given long wait-times—may attempt to seek free or
low-cost representation, which is more efficient and
effective for both applicants and USCIS. This

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Response: USCIS will update the document functionality.

Response: USCIS strives to draft our form instructions so that
the general public can understand how to complete our forms
without having to hire representation. We feel it is unnecessary
for an applicant to refer to USCIS internal policies to find
instructions for the proper completion of a form.

Response: USCIS strives to draft our form instructions so that
the general public can understand how to complete our forms
without having to hire representation.
USCIS also has concerns about unauthorized practice of law
and makes efforts to protect the public from it. USCIS
currently provides information on Scams, Fraud and

Misconduct at https://www.uscis.gov/scams-fraud-misconduct,
which includes, but not limited to:
•
•

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.16

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.17

Comment:
Page 1, “What is the Purpose of This Form I-914?”:
I support the reference to where an applicant may
find the definition of a severe form of trafficking in
persons.
Comment:
Page 2, “Who May File This Form?: I suggest
clarifying in the text at the top of this section that no
I-914A may be filed once the T-1 no longer holds T
nonimmigrant status (e.g. it expires or they have
adjusted status). This issue comes up regularly and
should be clearly communicated to applicants,
especially individuals who may be applying for
derivative family members pro se. Given limited
capacity of non-governmental organizations, I
suspect the number of individuals without access to
legal representation for derivative applications will
only continue to grow, making the instructions that
much more important. Including such information in
the form instructions is also a mechanism to help
ensure that survivors have access to information
regardless of whether that information was provided
to them by counsel.

Finding Legal Services: https://www.uscis.gov/scamsfraud-and-misconduct/avoid-scams/find-legal-services
List of Currently Disciplined
Practitioners: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/list-ofcurrently-disciplined-practitioners (DOJ website of
DHS and DOJ jointly disciplined practitioners)

Response: Thank you for your comment.

Response: Thank you for your suggestion. This is outside the
scope of this revision, although USCIS will consider how best
to communicate this to the public, including in potential future
form revisions.

3.18

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.19

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)
Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.20
3.21

Comment:
Page 2, “Who May File This Form?: I suggest
revising the note at the end of this section as
follows, for clarity: “NOTE: Although applications
for all eligible family members can be filed
concurrently, to approve the application for the adult
or minor child in the present danger of retaliation
category, USCIS must have already approved the
Form I-914, Supplement A for their parent.”
Comment: Page 5, Part 7, Interpreter’s Contact
Information, Certification, & Signature: I suggest
clarifying that no signature is required where phone
interpretation is used and instead, the interpreter
identification number and name of the interpretation
company should be included, where applicable.
Phone interpretation is often required in areas where
there is no in-person interpretation available.
Requiring in-person interpretation would be costprohibitive, is a language access issue, and creates
additional barriers for survivors. I have seen
questions arise about how to complete these fields in
such situations and therefore recommend
clarification of the instructions.
Comment:
Page 7, Number 10: There is a typo at the end of
this sentence (“11.”).
Comment:
Page 9, “Initial Evidence”: The language in the
section relating to applying for family members
after the principal applicant has submitted their
filing is unclear, specifically the requirement at
subsection (A), requiring any Form I-914A
submitted subsequent to the principal applicant’s
initial filing to be accompanied by “A. A new Form
I-914, Supplement A” (emphasis added). I suggest

Response: USCIS appreciates the suggestion and will clarify
the language.

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Response: USCIS agrees with the suggested edit and has made
the change.
Response:
Thank you for your suggestion. We have revised the section
for accuracy and clarity.

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.22

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.23

revising this section to clarify the meaning behind
this statement.
Comment:
Page 10, “Evidence of Cooperation with Reasonable
Requests from Law Enforcement”: For
consistency’s sake, I suggest that USCIS consider
revising the title of this section to accord with the
statutory and regulatory requirement, “compliance
with reasonable requests,” as opposed to
“cooperation.”
Comment:
Page 10, “Evidence of Cooperation with Reasonable
Requests from Law Enforcement”: I recommend
that USCIS remove the following sentence
“Although it is not required, you may include
information about why you did not provide or
attempt to obtain a Supplement B.” There is no
longer a requirement to demonstrate, as in the pre2016 version of the regulations, the applicant’s
“good faith attempts” to obtain an I-914B. Compare
8 CFR § 214.11(f)(3) (2009) with §§ 214.11(b)(3) &
(d)(3) (2016). The final rule similarly does not
require such a showing. Inclusion of the abovereferenced sentence is unnecessary and confusing
for both applicants and their representatives.
Instead, it would be helpful to reference what the
actual requirement is, namely an explanation about
compliance with reasonable requests from law
enforcement in the applicant’s personal statement,
as per 8 CFR §§ 214.204(c)(1)(iv), and any credible
evidence of cooperation, including an optional I914B, as per 8 CFR §§ 214.204(e) & (f). It does not
make sense to include in this section a reference to
information that is not required while failing to
mention with specificity what is required, and

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.24

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.25

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.26

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.27

nowhere in this section on law enforcement
cooperation is USCIS explicit that the applicant’s
statement needs to discuss their compliance with
reasonable requests from law enforcement.
Comment:
Page 11, “Personal Statement,” Number 1: “The
events surrounding the trafficking” should be a
separate bullet item, for clarity and in accordance
with the final rule language.
Comment:
Page 11, “Personal Statement,” Number 5: I suggest
removing “Any credible evidence that you would
like USCIS to consider” from this section as its
reference in the regulations refers to evidence other
than the applicant’s personal statement. See 8 CFR
§§ 214.204(c)(1) & (c)(2). This could be included in
the earlier section on pages 9-10, “Evidence to
Establish T Nonimmigrant Status.”
Comment:
Page 12, “Evidence to Establish Derivative T
Nonimmigrant Status”: I suggest clarifying in this
section, as well, that no I-914A may be filed and no
I-914A beneficiary may be admitted into the U.S. in
T nonimmigrant status once the principal has
adjusted status, as this is critical information for a T1 to be aware of.
Comment:
Page 12, “Evidence to Establish Derivative T
Nonimmigrant Status”: The text beginning with “If
you are a principal applicant over 21 years of age,
you may apply for your child…” does not make
sense to precede the numbered list that follows that
paragraph and I therefore suggest reordering the text
in this section. There is also an extra space at the
beginning of the quoted sentence.

Response: USCIS agrees with the suggested edit and has made
the change.

Response: USCIS will remove the extra space.
With regard to the ordering of text, this suggestion is out of
scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form and
instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

3.28

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.29

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.30

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.31

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.32

Comment:
Page 12, “Evidence to Establish Derivative T
Nonimmigrant Status”: For clarity, I suggest using
language similar to the Policy Manual regarding
age-out protections, specifically referencing the time
of filing as opposed to simply stating “at the time of
the principal application.” Similarly, I think it would
be most helpful for the instructions to refer to all the
applicable age-out protections as laid out in the
regulations and Policy Manual rather than just some
of them.
Comment:
Page 13, “Required Evidence”: First, a personal
statement is required evidence as per 8 CFR §
214.204(c)(1) and should be included in this section.
Additionally, I would suggest moving this section
earlier or combining it with the earlier section on
page 9, “Evidence to Establish T Nonimmigrant
Status.”
Comment: Page 15, “Bona Fide Determination
Process”: I suggest that the note in this section
specify, or at least reference, the BFD process for
individuals with I-914/I-914A applications pending
prior to the effective date, as how these applications
will be handled has been the source of many
questions since the publication of the final rule.
Comment:
Page 15, “Bona Fide Determination Process”: I
suggest USCIS consider including in the section on
employment authorization the (c)(40) BFD EAD
category.
Comment:
Page 15, “Travel While Your Form I-914 Is
Pending”: This statement, “departing from the
United States while your application is pending

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Response:
USCIS appreciates the suggestion and has made edits to correct
and clarify.

Response: USCIS appreciates the suggestion, but will not
make this change. Individuals who have already filed the Form
I-914 are not the intended audience for future form instructions.
USCIS will consider alternate ways to continue messaging this
to the public.
Response: USCIS agrees with the suggested edit and has made
the change.

Response: USCIS appreciates the suggestion and will clarify
the language.

Form I-914 (and I914A) Instructions
(4/1/24 edition)

3.33

could impact your ability to return to the United
States unless you or your family member have
another status which permits travel” is misleading.
While it may be technically correct, as it fails to
indicate that a principal applicant who departs the
U.S. after their trafficking will not be able to
establish their physical presence unless they meet
one of the exceptions under § 214.11(g)(2) (interim
final rule) or § 214.207(b) (final rule). I suggest
something to the effect of: “Filing of an application
for T nonimmigrant status does not grant you
permission to travel outside the United States.
Departing from the United States while your
application is pending could impact your ability to
establish eligibility for T nonimmigrant status.
Additionally, departing from the United States while
your application is pending could impact your
ability to return to the United States unless you or
your family member have another status which
permits travel. Even if you, as a T-1 applicant, have
another status that permits reentry into the U.S., you
may be unable to establish your physical presence
on account of trafficking as required by 8 CFR §
214.207 if you depart the U.S. after your trafficking
has ended.” This is critical information for T-1
applicants to be advised of especially if the
instructions contain information about travel during
the pendency of an I-914.
Comment:
Page 16, “Confidentiality”: I suggest including the
permissible disclosure described at § 214.216(b), as
I understand that such disclosure may be occurring
with more frequency and is taking attorneys and
their clients by surprise.

Response: USCIS appreciates the suggestion but will not make
this change. Permissible disclosure described at § 214.216(b) is
already encompassed in the 8 U.S.C 1367 protections listed in
the instructions and USCIS does not believe that further
specificity is necessary.

T Final Rule Form Revision Responses to 60-day FRN Public Comments
Public Comments (regulations.gov): USCIS-2011-0010-0082
60-day FRN Citation (federalregister.gov): 89 FR 34864
Publish Dates: April 30, 2024 – July 1, 2024
Commenters: 3
Form I-914B (4/1/24 3.34
edition)
Form I-914B (4/1/24 3.35
edition)
Form I-914B (4/1/24 3.36
edition)

Form I-914B (4/1/24 3.37
edition)
Form I-914B (4/1/24 3.38
edition)

Form I-914B (4/1/24 3.39
edition)

Comment:
Page 1, Part 2, Question 5: The “number” field does
not allow a numerical entry.
Comment:
Page 2, Part 2, Question 7: The “fax number” field
is missing.
Comment:
Page 2, Part 2, Question 11: I suggest revising to
“Case Number (if available).” This brief addition
clearly indicates that a case number is not required
for an LEA to sign an I-914B. As USCIS is likely
well aware, instructions are not always read or fully
digested, so simple changes like this can be helpful.
Comment:
Page 2, Part 3, Question 1: There are two “other”
fields and it is not clear why there would be more
than one.
Comment:
Page 2, Part 3, Question 3: I suggest revising the
following to: “Has the applicant expressed any fear
of retaliation or revenge if they had to depart from
or were removed from the United States?” Many
survivors do not specifically express fears relating
to “removal” per se, but rather, express fear of
return or harm in home country generally, which is
relevant to the analysis.
Comment:
Page 3, Part 3, Question 4: Often, the dates of the
criminal activity are a range rather than specific
dates. I suggest revising this section so specific
dates or a range of dates can be included. Making
the certifier’s task of completing this form easier
generally encourages its completion, which is
helpful for both USCIS and applicants.

Response: Response: USCIS will update the document
functionality.
Response: USCIS agrees with the suggested edit and has made
the change.
Response: USCIS agrees with the suggested edit and has added
“if applicable” to the form.

Response: USCIS agrees that there is an extra field and has
removed it.
Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Form I-914B (4/1/24 3.41
edition)

Form I-914B (4/1/24 3.42
edition)

Form I-914B (4/1/24 3.43
edition)

Comment:
Page 3, Part 3, Question 6: I suggest the following:
“Provide the date on which the investigation or
prosecution was initiated, if applicable.” Sometimes
an LEA will sign an I-914B even where a formal
investigation has not been opened. Again, making
the certifier’s task of completing this form easier
generally encourages its completion, which is
helpful for both USCIS and applicants.
Comment:
Page 3, Part 3, Question 7: I suggest the following:
“Provide the date on which the investigation or
prosecution was completed, if applicable.” An LEA
may sign this form prior to the conclusion of the
investigation or prosecution.
Comment:
Page 3, Part 4, Question 1D: I suggest revising this
because the age of majority is relevant to when the
trafficking took place, not the age at the time of LE
involvement. 3 USCIS-PM B.2.D.5. I suggest the
following language here: “Was under the age of 18
at the time of the trafficking victimization.” The age
of minority at the time of the trafficking
victimization is the relevant consideration here and
the option as is does not reflect that. 3 USCIS-PM
B.2.D.5; 8 CFR § 214.208(e)(2).
Comment:
Page 4, Part 6, Question 2: There is not always both
a certifying official and a supervisor of the
certifying official available to sign this form. For
example, a unit chief could be both the investigating
officer and the certifying official, or a judge may
sign the form as the certifying official with the
ability to detect trafficking. I suggest clarifying in
the form and instructions how to handle in these

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Response: USCIS appreciates the suggestion and will clarify
the language.

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Form I-914B
Instructions (4/1/24
edition)

3.44

Form I-914B
Instructions (4/1/24
edition)

3.45

situations to reduce barriers and encourage the
form’s use.
Comment:
Page 1, What is the Purpose of Form I-914
Supplement B?: Since an LEA may sign I-914B
even if it has not opened an investigation (and
therefore there has been no reasonable request for
assistance), I suggest amending this sentence to
something along the lines of: “You, as a Federal,
State, Tribal, or local law enforcement official use
Form I-914, Supplement B, Declaration for
Trafficking Victim, to provide evidence to United
States Citizenship and Immigration Services
(USCIS) that you believe an individual (the
applicant) submitting Form I-914, Application for T
Nonimmigrant Status, is a victim of a severe form of
trafficking in persons and has cooperated with any
reasonable requests for assistance in an investigation
or prosecution (if opened or initiated) of a crime
where trafficking is at least one central reason for
the commission of that crime.” Clarifying as early
as possible on this form that no investigation or
prosecution is required in order to sign the form is
important to avoid instances where busy LEAs stop
reading upon reaching “your reasonable requests for
assistance in an investigation or prosecution of a
crime. . . .”
Comment:
Page 1, What is the Purpose of Form I-914
Supplement B?: I suggest citing, as early as possible
in the instructions, to the regulations or policy
manual language that provides examples of what
agencies may be I-914B certifying agencies, as well
as to DHS’s T Visa Law Enforcement Resource
Guide, so that potential certifiers do not have to go

Response: USCIS agrees with the suggested edit and has made
the change.

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Form I-914B
Instructions (4/1/24
edition)

3.46

Form I-914B
Instructions (4/1/24
edition)

3.47

digging to ascertain if they are able to sign an I914B. USCIS could consider creating a section after
this first one entitled “Who Can Sign This Form?”
so this information is readily accessible to potential
certifiers rather than burying it in the “Specific
Instructions” section. Prominently including
information on potential certifying agencies could
be useful in mitigating reticence among some
agencies regarding signing I-914Bs.
Comment:
Page 1, When Should I Use Form I-914,
Supplement B?: Same comment as above to replace
“your reasonable requests for assistance . . .” with
“and has cooperated with any reasonable requests
for assistance in an investigation or prosecution (if
opened or initiated) of a crime where trafficking . . .
.”
Comment:
Page 1, When Should I Use Form I-914,
Supplement B?: For clarity’s sake, I suggest
revising the existing language as follows: “You do
not need to formally launch an investigation or file
charges to complete Form I-914, Supplement B.
You may complete Supplement B if an investigation
does not lead to an arrest or a prosecution.
Additionally, you may complete Supplement B even
if a victim decides to stop cooperating in an
investigation or prosecution because they fall under
the age-based exemption or trauma-based exception
at 8 CFR § 214.11(b)(3). Completing Supplement B
is not contingent on the outcome of a prosecution or
investigation. Completing Supplement B is at your
discretion. There is no statute of limitations related
to completing Supplement B.”

Response: USCIS agrees with the suggested edit and has made
the change.

Response: USCIS appreciates the suggestion, but will not
make this change. Completing an I-914B is at law
enforcement’s discretion and the instructions already indicate
this.

3.48

Comment: Page 3, Part 3, 1B: I recommend
Response: USCIS appreciates the suggestion and will clarify
clarifying the language here as follows, or to
the language.
something similar: “Sex trafficking where the victim
was under 18 years of age at the time of the
trafficking criminal activity.”
Preamble to 2016 Interim Regulations at 92273. As
written, it isn’t clear that the reference to the age of
minority here applies at the time of the trafficking as
opposed to some other time, and many potential
certifying agencies may be unfamiliar with the
statute and regulations.

Form I-914B
Instructions (4/1/24
edition)

3.49

Form I-914B
Instructions (4/1/24
edition)

3.50

Form I-914B
Instructions (4/1/24
edition)

3.51

Comment: Page 3, Part 4, Cooperation of the
Victim: I recommend clarifying that the age of
minority applies at the time of the trafficking (not
the time of interaction with LEA, application to
USCIS, etc.). 3 USCIS-PM B.2.D.5; 8 CFR §
214.208(e)(2). As currently written, how the agebased cooperation exemption works is unclear and
could lead to LEA refusal to certify. I suggest
revising to something along the lines of “. . . under
18 years of age at the time of the trafficking
criminal activity.”
Comment: Page 4, Part 6, Attestation: I suggest that
USCIS consider clarifying that in some instances,
the investigating officer and the certifying
supervisor may be the same individual.
Comment: Page 4, How Can I Provide Information
at a Later Date?: I suggest revising the order of this
paragraph so that it flows more logically. In doing
that reordering, I also suggest removing “[s]end any
written statement to USCIS at.” Suggested revised
text is as follows: “An agency can provide further
information to USCIS or formally withdraw or
disavow Form I-914, Supplement B, at a later date,

Response: USCIS appreciates the suggestion and will clarify
the language.

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.
Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.

Form I-765 (edition
date 8/28/24)

3.52

Form I-765
Instructions
(8/28/2024 edition)

3.53

even after this form is submitted to USCIS, if there
is new information or if the victim is no longer
cooperating with a reasonable request for assistance
in an investigation or prosecution. To do so, an
agency should send a letter on official agency
letterhead to USCIS at the address below describing
the reasons for providing further information or the
reasons for withdrawing or disavowing the
declaration. Include the victim’s name, date of birth,
and A-Number (if available) on all correspondence.
USCIS will allow the victim to rebut this
information. [VSC address]”
Comment: Page 2, Part 2, Number 9: Similar to the
I-914, I-914A, and I-914B, I recommend that
USCIS include an “another gender identity” option
for inclusivity and consistency reasons.
Comment: Page 14, “Bona Fide Determination
Process for T Nonimmigrant Status Principal
Applicants”: I recommend including in this section,
if true, that USCIS will not accept I-765
applications filed for I-914/I-914A applicants
pending prior to the effective date of the final rule
unless it conducts a BFD review after issuing an
RFE in the case and issues the applicant a notice of
eligibility indicating they may file an I-765. Clarity
regarding how USCIS will handle BFDs for cases
filed prior to the effective date of the final rule will
likely reduce submission of filings that USCIS will
reject and helps legal representatives manage client
expectations and provide clear information on
processes.

Response: Thank you for your comment. This suggestion is out
of scope for this revision. USCIS will review the entire form
and instructions for improvements in a future revision action.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion, USCIS will
consider how to best communicate this to the public, but
decline to include such specificity in the form instructions.

File Type	application/pdf
Author	Stout, Samantha J
File Modified	2024-08-13
File Created	2024-07-03