Indian technology professionals who were screened out of US hiring plans because of a $100,000 H-1B payment requirement may have a fresh opportunity to return to the recruitment pipeline, after US Citizenship and Immigration Services began approving petitions filed without the charge.
The approvals follow federal court orders blocking enforcement of the payment imposed under a presidential proclamation by US President Donald Trump. However, the development is not a blanket relaxation of US immigration rules: applicants must still meet the requirements of the H-1B programme, employers must comply with applicable procedures, and individual circumstances will determine whether a worker can travel and begin employment.
The USCIS has started approving petitions submitted without the payment, as per the immigration law firm Meltzer Hellrung, which said processing remained uneven, with some applications still pending beyond the 15-business-day deadline associated with premium processing.
For Indian professionals, the immediate question is no longer simply whether employers can afford the additional charge. It is whether employers are willing to reconsider candidates they excluded, whether pending petitions are moving and whether the workers concerned can complete the remaining steps to take up US employment.
Two court rulings have changed the immediate position
The $100,000 payment was introduced through a presidential proclamation in September 2025 and primarily affected certain new H-1B petitions involving workers outside the United States. The administration extended the proclamation in September 2026, but the fee subsequently faced fresh legal setbacks.
In June, a federal judge in Massachusetts blocked the charge in a case brought by 20 states. In July, the First Circuit Court of Appeals declined to suspend that ruling while the administration pursued its appeal.
A second federal judge, Haywood Gilliam, ruled in California on September 30 that federal agencies had failed to follow the necessary rule-making procedures before implementing the charge. His order blocked the agencies from enforcing the fee while the litigation proceeds.
Reuters reported that the lawsuits challenge the president’s authority to impose the payment unilaterally. The US Chamber of Commerce has also pursued separate litigation.
Steve Bressler, a lawyer with Democracy Forward, which represents plaintiffs challenging the fee, welcomed the California ruling.
“Today’s decision … protects a system that was thrown into chaos overnight,” Bressler said in a statement reported by Reuters.
The administration’s position is different. Trump argued that businesses had abused the H-1B program and replaced American workers with cheaper foreign labour. His administration has pursued additional screening and proposed changes to the selection process that would favour higher-skilled and better-paid workers.
The distinction matters because the courts’ decisions concern the legal basis for the additional payment. They do not remove the government’s ability to examine applications under existing immigration law or resolve separate policy proposals.
The fee also remains distinct from a proposed permanent charge of approximately $103,000 that the Department of Homeland Security began pursuing through a separate rule-making process. That proposal is not the same measure as the proclamation-based payment blocked by the courts.
Which Indian workers could benefit?
The potential beneficiaries include overseas candidates whose employers had delayed or abandoned hiring plans because of the expected additional cost. Some may be Indian professionals employed by multinational companies abroad; others may have left the US following layoffs or a lapse in immigration status.
The Economic Times report said employers could reconsider candidates based outside the country. However, an approved petition does not automatically mean a worker can immediately enter the US or start a job.
Workers who already hold a valid, unexpired H-1B visa stamp may be able to return with an approved petition for a new employer without needing a fresh consular appointment in some circumstances. Eligibility depends on their individual immigration history and the applicable rules.
Some workers previously counted against the H-1B cap, with time remaining under the six-year limit, may also qualify for a new petition without entering the annual lottery again.
Those who have never been counted against the cap should not assume that the court rulings create a new route around the selection process. Employers must establish which rules apply to each petition.
The programme’s annual statutory allocation is 65,000 regular H-1B visas, plus 20,000 additional places for eligible workers with advanced US degrees. H-1B status is generally available for up to three years initially and can usually be extended to a maximum of six years, subject to exceptions.
The additional $100,000 payment had sharply changed the economics of overseas recruitment. Reuters noted that H-1B fees had typically totalled approximately $2,000 to $5,000, depending on the circumstances. The proclamation-based charge was therefore many times the previous ordinary fee range.
For employers recruiting several overseas workers, the potential difference was substantial. For candidates, it could mean losing consideration before an employer even assessed their qualifications.
Premium processing does not guarantee an immediate decision
The latest development does not mean every petition filed without the payment will be approved immediately. The Economic Times reported that some petitions had remained pending beyond the 15-business-day premium-processing period.
Meltzer Hellrung said it had organised a multi-company mandamus action intended to compel USCIS to decide delayed petitions. The firm reported that approvals began coming through after it publicised the problem, before the lawsuit was filed.
The account illustrates the difference between a legal obstacle being removed and an individual application being adjudicated. A court order may change what a government agency can require, but it does not itself approve every case.
Employers should review pending applications, particularly those submitted under premium processing that have exceeded the relevant deadline. Applicants should ask their immigration counsel to confirm the status of their specific petition rather than assume that the court ruling has automatically resolved it.
Workers outside the US also cannot rely on H-1B portability rules to begin employment while awaiting the required approval. Alternative arrangements involving overseas employment or contracting would need to comply with the relevant legal and tax requirements.
What Indian applicants should do next
The immediate task is to establish the exact stage of the immigration process.
Applicants should ask their employers or lawyers whether a petition has been filed, whether the payment was made, whether the petition remains pending and whether an approval has been issued. Those with approved petitions should separately confirm visa-stamping and travel requirements.
Employers should also review candidates they previously rejected solely because of the expected payment, while checking whether each individual is eligible under the H-1B cap and other applicable rules.
The legal position remains subject to change. The administration has appealed the California ruling, while litigation over the Massachusetts order also continues.
For Indian professionals, the court decisions offer a potential opening, not a guarantee. The decisive questions are whether employers resume recruitment, whether USCIS processes affected petitions consistently and whether the government succeeds in restoring the fee through further litigation or a legally distinct measure.