go_guy123
08-24 04:52 PM
ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
Redeye
08-21 03:08 PM
Even though you wanted to file a lawsuit against EB3( I am EB3 2004, with US Masters and Indian Bachelors both in Computer Science) I will still go ahead give you some suggestions.
1) I am guessing since you are working for consulting company, you might have worked at client places here in US. Nowadays everyone is in the fashion of opening their own India office like Target, BOA etc. So if you have worked with these clients and have good references from a PM or VP then you might be able to get in India office fairly easily and with really good pay. You could try for managerial roles.
2)As someone suggested Real Estate is another option
3) Otherthing to look in to is opening a school, this will help serve the community and also make money for you. Schools in India are going nowhere, so very less risk.
Hope this helps you...but what I am not sure from your statements is, are you frustrated with the wait for GC or are you frustrated with making less than what you should be making or are you frustrated in general?
Do not know your age, could be mid life crisis :D think about it....take a vacation....
I am almost there and expecting green card approval anytime. But now I am having second thoughts now. The desi consulting company I work for had eight people a year ago and two of them now going back (and one more is negotiating) at salaries 20-35 lacs. Has anyone explored Indian job market, if yes then what is hot?
1) I am guessing since you are working for consulting company, you might have worked at client places here in US. Nowadays everyone is in the fashion of opening their own India office like Target, BOA etc. So if you have worked with these clients and have good references from a PM or VP then you might be able to get in India office fairly easily and with really good pay. You could try for managerial roles.
2)As someone suggested Real Estate is another option
3) Otherthing to look in to is opening a school, this will help serve the community and also make money for you. Schools in India are going nowhere, so very less risk.
Hope this helps you...but what I am not sure from your statements is, are you frustrated with the wait for GC or are you frustrated with making less than what you should be making or are you frustrated in general?
Do not know your age, could be mid life crisis :D think about it....take a vacation....
I am almost there and expecting green card approval anytime. But now I am having second thoughts now. The desi consulting company I work for had eight people a year ago and two of them now going back (and one more is negotiating) at salaries 20-35 lacs. Has anyone explored Indian job market, if yes then what is hot?
digitalborealis
01-10 02:14 AM
Hello All
Similar experience at Mumbai Consulate. Being a full time employee, and after showing all paystubs, employment letter , VO was not satisfied. 1/2 of the time , he was under impression that I was still working for a company, whose visa was stamped in 2008. :)
Another reason of frustration is they did not check all the documents I sent , which were mentioned in the green slip. Inspite of sending Research Document, I had got the reply saying that I did not send the Past, Current and Future Research Statement. So I resubmitted all the documents again on Dec 23rd,2010 . also added I am not working on any research topic presently or in near future . After that I did not hear back from consulate. So that means my case has been under processing?
Did anyone get the receipt of documents submission in response to Green Slip?
Please let me know
Thanks and Good LUCK
D
Similar experience at Mumbai Consulate. Being a full time employee, and after showing all paystubs, employment letter , VO was not satisfied. 1/2 of the time , he was under impression that I was still working for a company, whose visa was stamped in 2008. :)
Another reason of frustration is they did not check all the documents I sent , which were mentioned in the green slip. Inspite of sending Research Document, I had got the reply saying that I did not send the Past, Current and Future Research Statement. So I resubmitted all the documents again on Dec 23rd,2010 . also added I am not working on any research topic presently or in near future . After that I did not hear back from consulate. So that means my case has been under processing?
Did anyone get the receipt of documents submission in response to Green Slip?
Please let me know
Thanks and Good LUCK
D
a_yaja
01-13 11:51 AM
Sure, I will try to do that. But the lawyer has a mind of his own, a very adamant one who would not listen to anyones suggestions. Also, I am racing against time. I have very little time to get new EVLs and have my lawyer submit them. Thanks for the suggestion.
Did your exp. letter have the number of hours (40hrs/ week) mentioned? I had an RFE for my I-140 as well (one of the points in the RFE was for exp.) . The exp. letters I submitted did not mention 40 hrs/ week. I got the letters reissued with 40 hrs/ week and that cleared the RFE. The RFE clearly mentioned that the exp. letter did not specify the number of hours worked per week.
Make sure that the exp. letters match the requirements and your experience in the the approved Labor Certification - if all the requirements do not match, that could be a reason for the RFE as well.
Did your exp. letter have the number of hours (40hrs/ week) mentioned? I had an RFE for my I-140 as well (one of the points in the RFE was for exp.) . The exp. letters I submitted did not mention 40 hrs/ week. I got the letters reissued with 40 hrs/ week and that cleared the RFE. The RFE clearly mentioned that the exp. letter did not specify the number of hours worked per week.
Make sure that the exp. letters match the requirements and your experience in the the approved Labor Certification - if all the requirements do not match, that could be a reason for the RFE as well.
more...
trueguy
08-09 01:08 PM
Only 45 votes so far. EB3-I people dont have 5 seconds to vote even, how can we expect any help from Govt.
a_yaja
07-18 11:02 AM
what is your country of birth? I know dates never went current to sep'08 for india...
His priority date was May 2004 - not Sept. 2008. He kept his original priority date.
His priority date was May 2004 - not Sept. 2008. He kept his original priority date.
more...
xela
04-23 01:16 AM
everyone that sent in for july 2nd was accepted they did not send them back.
I have rd july 2nd and my pd has been current no approval yet.....
just means they might look at your case....hopefully...
I have rd july 2nd and my pd has been current no approval yet.....
just means they might look at your case....hopefully...
reno_john
06-18 12:34 PM
U need to Say the last entry because H1B visa will tell you the stamping city. SO u can go ahead and tell them the port of entry u came to USA after H1B stamp, since u will be sending a copy of ur passport and they will see ur Canada visa and also the H1 visa with Canada as the date of issuance and that will be in the USCIS database, because they verify before they issue the H1 visa.
more...
rbharol
09-26 08:37 PM
I am not very well informed legally, but sometime back we had a meeting with our company immigration lawyers and they said once filed, the catagories can't
be changed.
be changed.
Ram_C
11-19 06:16 PM
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On October 14, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our TEXAS SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
I have a question. Mine was filed on Aug 15th but, the online status says that it was received on 10/14. Is this common or is this in error? Should I call CS?
Thanks in advance.
I think this is an error on USCIS side, so I would suggest you to contact CS and have this corrected. on the other hand I'm not sure if this will make any difference as long as your PD and RD on your receipt notice is intact.
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On October 14, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our TEXAS SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
I have a question. Mine was filed on Aug 15th but, the online status says that it was received on 10/14. Is this common or is this in error? Should I call CS?
Thanks in advance.
I think this is an error on USCIS side, so I would suggest you to contact CS and have this corrected. on the other hand I'm not sure if this will make any difference as long as your PD and RD on your receipt notice is intact.
more...
austingc
12-24 10:25 PM
Please advise urgently.
Say today my I-140 is denied.
Current H1B is getting renewals due to labor pending for more than 1 year, so getting 1 year renewals.
Now I-140 is denied.
Lawyer is opening an MTR.
We dont know when the decision will come. May be positive, may be negative.
1.What happens to my current H1B which is due for renewal in Mar 2011. Can I continue to work, while MTR is pending.
2. Can I get extensions while MTR is pending.
3. If I get extension based on pending MTR, What happens to extended H1B if MTR says I-140 denied.
Sorry to hear about your I-140 denial. Can you tell us why it was denied?
1.Nothing will happen to your H1B, you can continue to work once you get your H1B extension is approved.
2. yes. You can get 1 year extension in March based on your pending MTR. It's a good thing your attorney filed an MTR.
3. If your 140 MTR is denied after your H1B extension is approved then you can work until your H1B expiration date. Make sure you file another labor immediately while the MRT is pending. So in case if your MRT is denied then at least you have a back up.
Say today my I-140 is denied.
Current H1B is getting renewals due to labor pending for more than 1 year, so getting 1 year renewals.
Now I-140 is denied.
Lawyer is opening an MTR.
We dont know when the decision will come. May be positive, may be negative.
1.What happens to my current H1B which is due for renewal in Mar 2011. Can I continue to work, while MTR is pending.
2. Can I get extensions while MTR is pending.
3. If I get extension based on pending MTR, What happens to extended H1B if MTR says I-140 denied.
Sorry to hear about your I-140 denial. Can you tell us why it was denied?
1.Nothing will happen to your H1B, you can continue to work once you get your H1B extension is approved.
2. yes. You can get 1 year extension in March based on your pending MTR. It's a good thing your attorney filed an MTR.
3. If your 140 MTR is denied after your H1B extension is approved then you can work until your H1B expiration date. Make sure you file another labor immediately while the MRT is pending. So in case if your MRT is denied then at least you have a back up.
nousername
02-24 07:23 PM
It clearly says "evaluation from an official who has the authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in the speciality at an accredited college or univeristy, which has a program for granting such credit based on an individual's training and/or work experience."
The above person is called a professor.
USCIS wants to know from a professor whether the job profile really needs the degree's you have i.e. is that a good match?
I'm an analyst myself and was asked if MBA is relevant to what the job is. Any educated person can answer that question but USCIS wanted a letter from some professor. If you attorney can not do it then approach your old professors and tell them that you need a letter stating that the job profile you have requires the degree which you also have.. Makes sense??? More like a recommendation letter without actually stating your name.
Hi NoUserName,
here more details:
Bachelors in Civil
Masters in Civil
And having 3+ years experience as computer systems analyst
My lawyer is saying just educational evaluation is fine but after I read the query they are looking for more.
I really confused how to answer this query, if you have any ideal please help me
The above person is called a professor.
USCIS wants to know from a professor whether the job profile really needs the degree's you have i.e. is that a good match?
I'm an analyst myself and was asked if MBA is relevant to what the job is. Any educated person can answer that question but USCIS wanted a letter from some professor. If you attorney can not do it then approach your old professors and tell them that you need a letter stating that the job profile you have requires the degree which you also have.. Makes sense??? More like a recommendation letter without actually stating your name.
Hi NoUserName,
here more details:
Bachelors in Civil
Masters in Civil
And having 3+ years experience as computer systems analyst
My lawyer is saying just educational evaluation is fine but after I read the query they are looking for more.
I really confused how to answer this query, if you have any ideal please help me
more...
seahawks
08-17 09:46 AM
no refunds, USCIS does not work that way, checks get cashed before they work on a case. Once the checks are cashed, no refunds. The only scenario is if you fell within the cap and they wouldn't accept your application, the whole packet is returned which then will have the checks within the packet. Hope that makes sense:?
chem2
08-29 10:14 PM
PAR: parolee
more...
logiclife
06-09 11:06 AM
Uptill 2001/2002 H1B transfer/extensions used to take 15 days to 1 month. Now they take anywhere between 4-8 months. You'll see once the premium I-140 comes into being. The regular I-140 will take forever. Premium processings have implications on regular processing. Basically they are discouraging people to file in regular queue.
I disagree. The introduction of premium processing didnt slow regular H1B transfer down. H1B transfer was slow even before premium processing existed.
It also depends on traffic. Some years, when H1 quota was 195K, obviously the number would slow people down.
I disagree. The introduction of premium processing didnt slow regular H1B transfer down. H1B transfer was slow even before premium processing existed.
It also depends on traffic. Some years, when H1 quota was 195K, obviously the number would slow people down.
amitjoey
07-17 07:17 PM
I think we need to send flowers with thank you note to IV core members and congress woman.Let us get vote and send flowers to those addresses.
Thank you
Instead send $$ as donations to IV. Contribute.
Thank you
Instead send $$ as donations to IV. Contribute.
more...
madmax78
01-26 08:47 AM
Come down to Atlanta my friend. There is a large indian community here, lot of good schools, all options for entertainment, and a reasonable weather. I have been living here for 6 years and I am happy with this place.
desi3933
02-11 10:43 AM
Hi All,
I am in a situation that my L1B extension application is denied on 02/10/2009. My current L1B is valid till March 31st 2009. I am trying to find the options I have with me now... I have H1B approved from another employer but I have not joined them.
As per my understanding these are the options:
1) This denial is for L1B Blanket Petition, so I think I should be able to apply extension again with L1B individual petition as I believe Obama government is rejecting all L1 Blanket visa as they this people are misusing it...
2) I can join my H1 employer...
Can anyone of you please suggest if these options are correct OR is there any other better option available...
Eagerly waiting for responses...
Thanks,
Gagan Chodhry
Were you in status at the time of L1 extension? Probably not, as your H1 extension was approved with new I-94 starting Oct 1st.
You applied for L1 extension on Oct 15th.
Would you mind sharing the denial reason with us?
__________________
Not a legal advice.
I am in a situation that my L1B extension application is denied on 02/10/2009. My current L1B is valid till March 31st 2009. I am trying to find the options I have with me now... I have H1B approved from another employer but I have not joined them.
As per my understanding these are the options:
1) This denial is for L1B Blanket Petition, so I think I should be able to apply extension again with L1B individual petition as I believe Obama government is rejecting all L1 Blanket visa as they this people are misusing it...
2) I can join my H1 employer...
Can anyone of you please suggest if these options are correct OR is there any other better option available...
Eagerly waiting for responses...
Thanks,
Gagan Chodhry
Were you in status at the time of L1 extension? Probably not, as your H1 extension was approved with new I-94 starting Oct 1st.
You applied for L1 extension on Oct 15th.
Would you mind sharing the denial reason with us?
__________________
Not a legal advice.
pappu
08-15 08:41 AM
what Indian congressional representatives or Indian caucas..etc are doing for Indian immigrants??
do they have any word to say in this deep visa retrogression for indian origin?
they will make any statement only if they are pounded by letters from us. if you want you can post their contacts on the forum and everyone can write letters to them.
do they have any word to say in this deep visa retrogression for indian origin?
they will make any statement only if they are pounded by letters from us. if you want you can post their contacts on the forum and everyone can write letters to them.
sharadara
09-01 01:17 AM
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I am moving to Spain because my husband got a job offer there.
signin241
07-24 07:21 PM
Hello,
I have an unfortunate situation. My parents names are misspelled in the Birth certificate compared to the Passport parents name page. Do we need to submit the parents names page of the passport when we submit our documents for 485 ?? Please let me know if this will be a problem and if there is a work around for this ??
Also if I have a Birth certificate (with my actual full name - dated in 2007 though), do I need to submit the affidavits ??
Thanks
I have an unfortunate situation. My parents names are misspelled in the Birth certificate compared to the Passport parents name page. Do we need to submit the parents names page of the passport when we submit our documents for 485 ?? Please let me know if this will be a problem and if there is a work around for this ??
Also if I have a Birth certificate (with my actual full name - dated in 2007 though), do I need to submit the affidavits ??
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment