[House Report 117-237]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


117th Congress   }                                     {        Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session      }                                     {       117-237

======================================================================



 
    FOR THE RELIEF OF ARPITA KURDEKAR, GIRISH KURDEKAR, AND VANDANA 
                                KURDEKAR

                                _______
                                

 February 1, 2022.--Referred to the Private Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Nadler, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 680]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 680) for the relief of Arpita Kurdekar, Girish 
Kurdekar, and Vandana Kurdekar, having considered the same, 
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that 
the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     1
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     2
Hearings.........................................................     3
Committee Consideration..........................................     3
Committee Votes..................................................     3
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     3
Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects..........................     3
New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost 
  Estimate.......................................................     3
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     5
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     5
Advisory on Earmarks.............................................     5
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................     5

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 680, ``For the relief of Arpita Kurdekar, Girish 
Kurdekar, and Vandana Kurdekar,'' would provide the 
beneficiaries of this private bill with an opportunity to 
obtain lawful permanent resident status in the United States.

                Background and Need for the Legislation


A. Immigration Background

    Arpita Kurdekar arrived in the United States from India in 
August 2014 on a temporary F-1 student visa in pursuit of a 
master's degree in civil engineering at the University of 
Buffalo in New York. Ms. Kurdekar has continued to maintain 
lawful status under the terms and conditions of her student 
visa and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in structural 
engineering at the University of Connecticut. Her father and 
mother, Girish Kurdekar and Vandana Kurdekar, last entered the 
United States in 2016 on B-2 visitor visas. They have both been 
granted multiple B-2 extensions and have maintained such status 
since entry. All three family members lack viable options to 
remain in the United States permanently.

B. Medical Condition

    In September 2016, Arpita Kurdekar was struck by a tree 
limb and suffered a severe spinal cord injury, rendering her 
instantly paralyzed from the neck down. Shortly after the 
accident, her parents came to the United States to provide 
their only daughter with the full-time care, assistance, and 
support that she requires.
    Here in the United States, Ms. Kurdekar has access to the 
advanced physical therapy services necessary to manage her 
condition through her private health insurance. Ms. Kurdekar is 
currently employed as a Graduate Research Fellow and Research 
Assistant at the University of Connecticut and receives 
supplemental financial assistance in the form of long-term 
disability and other insurance payments as well as investment 
income. Lacking employment authorization due to their temporary 
visitor status, neither Girish Kurdekar nor Vandana Kurdekar 
are currently employed.

C. House Precedent for Consideration of Private Immigration Bills

    In the modern era, Congress has passed numerous private 
bills for similarly situated individuals, including in cases 
where the beneficiary, or the U.S. citizen spouse or child of a 
beneficiary, suffered from a serious illness or medical 
condition.
    For example, in the 106th Congress, the House passed a 
private bill for Marina Khalina and her son Albert Miftakhov, 
the latter of whom had cerebral palsy and would require 
lifelong medical treatment that was unavailable in their home 
country of Russia.\1\ Also in the 106th Congress, the House 
passed a private bill for the relief of Jacqueline Salinas--who 
was paralyzed from the waist down--and her children, one of 
whom was afflicted with bone cancer.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\See H.R. Rep. No. 106-956 (2000); See also S.150, 106th Cong. 
(1999).
    \2\See H.R. Rep. No. 106-962 (2000); See also S.1513, 106th Cong. 
(1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the 104th Congress, the House passed a private bill for 
Oscar Salas-Velazquez, whose U.S. citizen child and wife were 
carriers of an antigen that predisposes them to developing 
Reiter's syndrome--a severe, disabling, incurable arthritic 
disease which can be triggered by an intestinal infection from 
organisms widespread in Mexico.\3\ Requiring Mr. Salas-
Velazquez's wife and child to join him in Mexico would very 
likely result in the development of Reiter's syndrome.\4\ In 
the 106th Congress, the House also passed a private bill for 
Saeed Rezai, whose U.S. citizen wife was stricken with multiple 
sclerosis.\5\ Medical professionals indicated that her 
condition would likely deteriorate rapidly from the severe 
stress resulting from her husband's removal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\See H.R. Rep. No. 104-810 (1996); See also H.R. 1031, 104th 
Cong. (1995).
    \4\Id.
    \5\See H.R. Rep. No. 106-905 (2000); See also H.R. 5266, 106th 
Cong. (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Similarly, if the Kurdekar family is forced to return to 
their home country of India, where access to the specialized 
treatment and accommodations that are necessary to sustain 
Arpita Kurdekar's quality of life is both limited and costly, 
they will undoubtedly experience excessive hardship. As such, 
the Committee has determined that H.R. 680 meets the medical 
condition precedent.

                                Hearings

    The Committee on the Judiciary held no hearings on H.R. 
680.

                        Committee Consideration

    On September 29, 2021, the Committee met in open session 
and ordered the bill, H.R. 680, favorably reported without 
amendment, by a voice vote, a quorum being present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of House Rule XIII, the 
Committee advises that there were no recorded votes during the 
Committee's consideration of H.R. 680.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of House Rule, the 
Committee advises that the findings and recommendations of the 
Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) 
of House Rule X, are incorporated in the descriptive portions 
of this report.

                Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of House Rule XIII, the 
Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

   New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of House Rule XIII and section 
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and pursuant to 
clause (3)(c)(3) of House Rule XIII and section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee sets forth, 
with respect to the bill, H.R. 680, the following analysis and 
estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                  Washington, DC, January 11, 2022.
Hon. Jerrold Nadler,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for these five bills:
     H.R. 187, For the relief of Victoria Galindo 
Lopez;
     H.R. 680, For the relief of Arpita Kurdekar, 
Girish Kurdekar, and Vandana Kurdekar;
     H.R. 681, For the relief of Rebecca Trimble;
     H.R. 739, For the relief of Median El-Moustrah; 
and
     H.R. 785, For the relief of Maria Isabel Bueso 
Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria Barrera De 
Bueso.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is David 
Rafferty.
            Sincerely,
                                            Mark P. Hoeller
                                           (For Phillip L. Swagel).
    Enclosure.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

    On September 29, 2021, the House Committee on the Judiciary 
ordered reported five bills that would allow the people named 
in each bill to become lawful permanent residents:
     H.R. 187, For the relief of Victoria Galindo 
Lopez;
     H.R. 680, For the relief of Arpita Kurdekar, 
Girish Kurdekar, and Vandana Kurdekar;
     H.R. 681, For the relief of Rebecca Trimble;
     H.R. 739, For the relief of Median El-Moustrah; 
and
     H.R. 785, For the relief of Maria Isabel Bueso 
Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria Barrera De 
Bueso.
    Enacting each of those five bills could increase direct 
spending and reduce revenues because lawful permanent residents 
are eligible for certain federal benefits, such as Medicaid and 
premium tax credits for health insurance purchased through the 
marketplaces established by the Affordable Care Act, if they 
otherwise meet the eligibility requirements for those benefits. 
CBO estimates that those effects would not be significant 
because of the small number of people who would be affected by 
each bill.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is David Rafferty. 
The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy 
Director of Budget Analysis.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of House Rule XIII, no provision 
of H.R. 680 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the 
federal government known to be duplicative of another federal 
program.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
House Rule XIII, H.R. 680 would provide Arpita Kurdekar, Girish 
Kurdekar, and Vandana Kurdekar with an opportunity to obtain 
lawful permanent resident status in the United States.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of House Rule XXI, H.R. 680 
does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 9(d), 9(e), 
or 9(f) of House Rule XXI.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    The following discussion describes the bill as reported by 
the Committee.
    Sec. 1. Permanent Resident Status for Arpita Kurdekar, 
Girish Kurdekar, and Vandana Kurdekar. Subsection (a) provides 
that Arpita Kurdekar, Girish Kurdekar, and Vandana Kurdekar 
shall each be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for 
adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence upon filing 
the appropriate application.
    Subsection (b) provides that if Arpita Kurdekar, Girish 
Kurdekar, or Vandana Kurdekar enter the United States before 
the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), they shall be 
considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall be 
eligible for adjustment of status as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    Subsection (c) requires Arpita Kurdekar, Girish Kurdekar, 
and Vandana Kurdekar to apply for an immigrant visa or 
adjustment of status within 2 years after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    Subsection (d) provides that upon granting an immigrant 
visa or permanent residence to Arpita Kurdekar, Girish 
Kurdekar, and Vandana Kurdekar, the Secretary of State shall 
reduce by three, the total number of immigrant visas that are 
made available to natives of the country of their birth.
    Subsection (e) provides that the natural parents, brothers, 
and sisters of Arpita Kurdekar, Girish Kurdekar, and Vandana 
Kurdekar shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded 
any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and 
Nationality Act.

                                  [all]