Immigration Update: Court Reported to Have Blocked the $100,000 H-1B Fee — What Is Confirmed, and What Employers Should Not Assume Yet
Immigration Update: Court Reported to Have Blocked the $100,000 H-1B Fee — What Is Confirmed, and What Employers Should Not Assume Yet
Published October 2, 2026.
Several immigration law firms and news outlets reported on October 1, 2026 that a federal judge in California has barred the government from implementing the $100,000 H-1B petition fee. The reports concern Global Nurse Force et al. v. Trump et al., No. 4:25-cv-08454, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
We are publishing this because our clients are already asking about it. We are also being direct about something important: we have not been able to read the court's order, and neither has anyone else who has written about it in terms we can check. Below is the line between what is confirmed and what is not.
What is confirmed
The case exists and is pending. Global Nurse Force et al. v. Trump et al., No. 4:25-cv-08454, was filed in the Northern District of California on November 25, 2025 as a challenge under the Administrative Procedure Act. We confirmed this through the U.S. Government Publishing Office's official federal courts collection.
The underlying fee is real and was already in force. As we reported on September 21, 2026, a presidential proclamation signed September 18, 2026 conditioned certain H-1B entries on a $100,000 payment, effective 12:01 a.m. EDT on September 21, 2026.
What is not confirmed
The order itself. We could not open the signed order or the docket entry through any official source available to us. Specifically, these points remain unverified:
The date. Published accounts give both September 30 and October 1, 2026.
The scope. Some accounts describe relief running only to the named plaintiffs. Others describe the fee policies being vacated more broadly. These are very different outcomes for an employer who is not a party to the case.
The procedural posture. It has been described both as a preliminary injunction and as vacatur and remand.
Whether a stay or an appeal is in place. Given the history of this fee, an emergency appellate application would not be surprising, and it could change the practical position within days.
A news report, a law firm alert, or a party's own filing is not an adjudicated change. Until the order is read, this is a report.
What applicants and employers should know
Do not change a filing plan on the strength of these reports. If your petition would otherwise carry the $100,000 payment, treat that obligation as live until the order is confirmed and its scope is known. Filing on the assumption that the fee has gone away — when the relief may reach only the named plaintiffs — is the expensive mistake available here.
It is also worth noting what is not reported as affected by this order: H-1B petitions for beneficiaries already in the United States, H-1B extensions and amendments, the H-1B cap registration process and its fees, and the ordinary USCIS H-1B filing fee schedule. No published account describes any of those as touched.
If you are weighing a filing in the next two weeks, the right move is to confirm the order's status before you commit, not after.
How we can help
Our consultants are former U.S. diplomats who spent their careers adjudicating visa cases. We can help you read what an order like this actually does to your specific filing, separate what has legally changed from what has merely been reported, and decide whether to file now or wait.
Considering an H-1B filing and unsure where this leaves you? Book a consultation with our former U.S. diplomats.
Sources
Official case record, Global Nurse Force v. Trump, No. 4:25-cv-08454 (N.D. Cal.): https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-cand-4_25-cv-08454
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California: https://www.cand.uscourts.gov
PACER, federal court records: https://pacer.uscourts.gov
White House presidential actions: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/
Comments