East Bay Men Plead Guilty to Conspiracy to Commit H1-B Visa Fraud Claiming Clients Would Work for the University of California

Why It Matters

The case highlights vulnerabilities in the H‑1B program that can be exploited for profit, reducing the talent pool for genuine employers and prompting tighter enforcement across agencies.

Key Takeaways

• Rajidi ran two firms that filed fraudulent H‑1B petitions.
• Mada used his UCANR CIO title to legitimize false visa claims.
• Fraud diverted H‑1B slots from legitimate employers and competitors.
• Defendants face up to five years prison and $250k fine.
• Investigation involved DHS, HSI, Treasury IG, and USCIS fraud unit.

Pulse Analysis

The H‑1B Specialty Occupation visa program, designed to bring highly skilled foreign talent to U.S. companies, has long been a target for abuse. Fraudsters exploit the system by misrepresenting job duties or employer intent, inflating demand for a limited quota of visas. Law‑breakers often use reputable institutions as a veneer of legitimacy, knowing that USCIS places weight on established entities when evaluating petitions. This case underscores how a single university official’s endorsement can sway immigration decisions, creating a lucrative black market for pre‑approved visas.

In the recent prosecution, prosecutors detailed a scheme where Rajidi’s firms secured H‑1B approvals by falsely asserting that foreign workers would be assigned to the University of California’s Agriculture and Natural Resources division. Mada, as the division’s CIO, provided the necessary credibility, despite lacking authority to hire H‑1B staff. Once the visas were granted, the parties marketed the workers to unrelated clients, effectively siphoning visas away from companies that complied with the rules. The multi‑agency investigation—spanning DHS, Homeland Security Investigations, the Treasury Inspector General, and USCIS’s fraud unit—demonstrates the coordinated effort to clamp down on such schemes.

The broader implications for businesses are clear: heightened scrutiny of H‑1B petitions will likely increase compliance costs and extend processing times. Companies must ensure that job descriptions, employer attestations, and recruitment practices are fully substantiated to avoid association with fraudulent activity. For universities and other large institutions, the case serves as a warning to enforce strict internal controls over who can represent the organization in immigration filings. As enforcement intensifies, firms that prioritize transparent, verifiable hiring processes will retain access to the valuable H‑1B talent pool while mitigating legal risk.