bmoni
12-22 08:42 PM
I thought the same thing when i read it first time ...
see the very next sentence after that statement
once the alien’s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation. "This includes cases where a change of employer has occurred"
If you read clearly then it says that you can keep the PD in your new employer GC process. You may loose that opportunity only if there was a fraud in the previous I140 and USICS revokes that I140.
once the alien’s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation.
So if your current I140 is clean then you will be able to use the PD in your next application for GC with the new employer.
see the very next sentence after that statement
once the alien’s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation. "This includes cases where a change of employer has occurred"
If you read clearly then it says that you can keep the PD in your new employer GC process. You may loose that opportunity only if there was a fraud in the previous I140 and USICS revokes that I140.
once the alien’s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation.
So if your current I140 is clean then you will be able to use the PD in your next application for GC with the new employer.
wallpaper Gallbladder polyp
Libra
08-10 03:08 PM
from your signature it says you contributed and you voted 'no', am i missing something here?
\/\/\/\/\/\/\\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\\/
obviously
08-04 11:45 AM
Thanks for the 2 quick responses... albeit, opposite in recommendation :)
1. No need to file new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Any risks that we should think about?
2. File new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Apart from the additional cost and document preparation time, is there any other downside?
Funny thing is before this happened, I ran into a lot of threads suggesting interfiling was easy. Now that it is at the doorstep, there are quite a few questions and some confusion. I am thinking of getting a 20 min appt with the M law firm.
Appreciate any responses or assistance!!!!
Cheers!
I found the following info from Ron G's website, not sure that most of it applies in this case... since both I-140 have been approved and the later one under EB2 does reference the EB3 priority date.
When an I-140 is approved, your priority date is perfected. If the labor substitution I-140 has been approved, then you own that priority date forever. If you have to file the new I-140 before the old one is approved, you can later show the CIS the two priority dates (from the petition approval notices) and pick the better preference category and earlier priority date - even though they may be from different petitions. In this case, "later" means after the I-140 with the earlier priority date is approved. All you need to do is write to the CIS and enclose copies of the relevant approval notices and the I-485 receipt notice. What you should do is make sure that they consolidate both I-140 petitions into the same file. You don't need to file a new I-485, all you need to do in interfile your second I-140.
You should make a copy of the approval notice for the first I-140, a copy of the receipt notice for the second I-140, and the write a letter to the CIS, asking them to give your second I-140 the priority date established by the first. You can cite the regulatory authority found HERE. (Refer text below) Send it to the correspondence address shown in the lower left portion of the receipt notice.
You can upgrade your preference classification while staying with the same employer, but you will need a new job. Attempting to use the same job with different minimum qualifications will call into question the legitimacy of the original labor certification. If the second I-140 is denied, it will have no effect on the first. There shouldn't be any difficulty porting in an LC substitution situation.
The CIS regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(e) provides for the retention of a previously established priority date under the circumstances described below:
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. --
A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
1. No need to file new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Any risks that we should think about?
2. File new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Apart from the additional cost and document preparation time, is there any other downside?
Funny thing is before this happened, I ran into a lot of threads suggesting interfiling was easy. Now that it is at the doorstep, there are quite a few questions and some confusion. I am thinking of getting a 20 min appt with the M law firm.
Appreciate any responses or assistance!!!!
Cheers!
I found the following info from Ron G's website, not sure that most of it applies in this case... since both I-140 have been approved and the later one under EB2 does reference the EB3 priority date.
When an I-140 is approved, your priority date is perfected. If the labor substitution I-140 has been approved, then you own that priority date forever. If you have to file the new I-140 before the old one is approved, you can later show the CIS the two priority dates (from the petition approval notices) and pick the better preference category and earlier priority date - even though they may be from different petitions. In this case, "later" means after the I-140 with the earlier priority date is approved. All you need to do is write to the CIS and enclose copies of the relevant approval notices and the I-485 receipt notice. What you should do is make sure that they consolidate both I-140 petitions into the same file. You don't need to file a new I-485, all you need to do in interfile your second I-140.
You should make a copy of the approval notice for the first I-140, a copy of the receipt notice for the second I-140, and the write a letter to the CIS, asking them to give your second I-140 the priority date established by the first. You can cite the regulatory authority found HERE. (Refer text below) Send it to the correspondence address shown in the lower left portion of the receipt notice.
You can upgrade your preference classification while staying with the same employer, but you will need a new job. Attempting to use the same job with different minimum qualifications will call into question the legitimacy of the original labor certification. If the second I-140 is denied, it will have no effect on the first. There shouldn't be any difficulty porting in an LC substitution situation.
The CIS regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(e) provides for the retention of a previously established priority date under the circumstances described below:
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. --
A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
2011 +gallbladder+ultrasound
villamonte6100
10-05 10:49 AM
hi, Do you know: How recent, which nationality, when was his/her aos filed
Sheela, you must be an aussie?
Sheela, you must be an aussie?
more...
sku
01-09 03:53 PM
Yes, I want to know too, I don't know anybody personally who lost the job.
smuggymba
09-22 07:43 PM
This is a good bill for people who are already on H1 and EAD ...what's wrong that in bringing the jobs back home ?
Don't worry my friend...H1s, L1s, EAD.....they will go after everyone one by one.
Don't worry my friend...H1s, L1s, EAD.....they will go after everyone one by one.
more...
richi121175
05-23 01:00 AM
Is there any provision in the current bill to allow concurrent filing and have EAD even if the PD is not current? That can stop us from being exploited by some bad employers out there.
2010 Some Gall Bladder Ultrasound pathology Multiple Choice Questions.
Jeff Wheeler
06-08 07:25 PM
Some really great ones. Congratulations to whomever wins (although I'm sure I'll congratulate you again), and thanks for holding this great contest. :)
more...
i4u
12-22 10:07 AM
permfiling have you got your gc? approved and waiting for the card?
Trying to figure out if all the eb2 05 filers are cleared.
Trying to figure out if all the eb2 05 filers are cleared.
hair This gallbladder ultrasound
linuxra
07-23 03:10 PM
I heard from some other people if they are in vsg their GCs are not getting approved as it is not @ our fault why we need to bear this...I am coming to conclusion that vsg case is affecting employees...any solution u are trying....
more...
psam
08-26 04:17 PM
Hello all,
It appears that my green card is lost in mail.
My spouse received her 10 days back. Our 485 was approved on same day, so I think mine must be lost.
I will wait for another couple of days for it to appear. Meanwhile I had few questions
1. What is the process to getting a duplicate?
2. If I just get GC stamped on my passport, will I be able to transit from Paris or London airport?
It appears that my green card is lost in mail.
My spouse received her 10 days back. Our 485 was approved on same day, so I think mine must be lost.
I will wait for another couple of days for it to appear. Meanwhile I had few questions
1. What is the process to getting a duplicate?
2. If I just get GC stamped on my passport, will I be able to transit from Paris or London airport?
hot bowel intussusception
gcformeornot
05-29 04:26 PM
For the record I do not have a problem. Employer is a very large company and I have worked in the same location for close to 10 years with a well maintained LCA history. So chill. My eyes are wide open in matters important to me.
The reason for being pissed is that these bull issues are manufactured for a commercial reason (by ) and with the express purpose to distract from the main and important goals for advocacy to solve this frustrating retrogession problem.
You on the other hand is a desperate fool on someone's illegitimate (from a moral perspective) payroll. Seriously man have some shame. BTW Are you and EASTINDIA the same person? You sound like you are.
Murthy Law Firm Attorney 6
Attorney posted May 29, 2010 12:34 PM
Call the Murthy Law Firm after the holiday weekend and get some help.
We have started to see this issue. The USCIS trying to deny I-485s due to LCA failures. The reason the LCAs aren't proper, usually, is that the employer relocated the person w/o doing a new LCA. The employee usually has no idea, since the LCA is the employer's filing and there used to be a lot less attention/awareness about LCA issues.
We have developed a number of arguments regarding this matter....including the "no fault of your own" concept and arguments regarding status violations vs LCA violations etc. This is a new development.
The reason why it is important is that it is necessary to be in status when filing the I-485. Prior status violations exceeding 180 days prior to or after filing the I-485 are grounds for I-485 denials.
It is a complicated topic. If the USCIS persists in this matter, there are going to be a lot of cases with this type of problem.
Urgent Notice of Intent to Deny I-485, LCA amendment not filed - Topic Powered by Infopop (http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=8951088502&r=1511058602#1511058602)
The reason for being pissed is that these bull issues are manufactured for a commercial reason (by ) and with the express purpose to distract from the main and important goals for advocacy to solve this frustrating retrogession problem.
You on the other hand is a desperate fool on someone's illegitimate (from a moral perspective) payroll. Seriously man have some shame. BTW Are you and EASTINDIA the same person? You sound like you are.
Murthy Law Firm Attorney 6
Attorney posted May 29, 2010 12:34 PM
Call the Murthy Law Firm after the holiday weekend and get some help.
We have started to see this issue. The USCIS trying to deny I-485s due to LCA failures. The reason the LCAs aren't proper, usually, is that the employer relocated the person w/o doing a new LCA. The employee usually has no idea, since the LCA is the employer's filing and there used to be a lot less attention/awareness about LCA issues.
We have developed a number of arguments regarding this matter....including the "no fault of your own" concept and arguments regarding status violations vs LCA violations etc. This is a new development.
The reason why it is important is that it is necessary to be in status when filing the I-485. Prior status violations exceeding 180 days prior to or after filing the I-485 are grounds for I-485 denials.
It is a complicated topic. If the USCIS persists in this matter, there are going to be a lot of cases with this type of problem.
Urgent Notice of Intent to Deny I-485, LCA amendment not filed - Topic Powered by Infopop (http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=8951088502&r=1511058602#1511058602)
more...
house folded Phrygian+cap+gallbladder+ultrasound Mixall over the masonic eye,
nb_des
03-17 01:33 PM
I agree. Remember there were two backlog elimination centers and the processing from Philly center was slow. So a person with a later 2004 EB2 PD application and whose LC was cleared from Dallas must have got his GC where as someone with an earlier PD was stuck in Philly. Most of the Dallas guys got their GC around that time.
That is so not true. Even though Dallas was faster than Philly, it only cleared labor for 2003 and earlier filers in 2005. Essentially Dallas mostly cleared only those cases in 2005 which were stuck at regional and not state level. My labor was cleared in late 2006.
That is so not true. Even though Dallas was faster than Philly, it only cleared labor for 2003 and earlier filers in 2005. Essentially Dallas mostly cleared only those cases in 2005 which were stuck at regional and not state level. My labor was cleared in late 2006.
tattoo Gallbladder Ultrasound
snathan
05-19 04:25 PM
The statue of limitation is, i believe, 2 years.
No, its only 12 months.
No, its only 12 months.
more...
pictures cap+gallbladder+ultrasound
coopheal
12-04 05:15 PM
I cannot make it to the rally but will contribute 100$ towards the efforts.
Thanks
Thanks
dresses +gallbladder+ultrasound
sabr
09-18 01:40 PM
my I-140 is pending for than 600 days as well in addition to my pending I-485.
while using EAD with my current GC applying employer(lets say not
getting paid as in this economy its hard to find corp to corp jobs), can I
work another job full time using EAD?
while using EAD with my current GC applying employer(lets say not
getting paid as in this economy its hard to find corp to corp jobs), can I
work another job full time using EAD?
more...
makeup Ultrasound is able to capture
usirit
11-21 12:14 AM
You are from ROW....here are some things to consider....
Is your new employer filing your GC under EB-2? If the answer is yes, then you should definitely take the new job and re-file GC and not worry about your EB-3 perm that is pending.
If your new employer is going to file under EB-3, then you have to evaluate which job is better for you (as far as pay, position etc.). If you think the new job is much better than what you have now, then I think you should still go for it. Your PD is very recent and a PD of Aug 2007 and a PD of (say) Feb/Mar 2008 has approximately the same value (according to me).
You have a valid H-1B until June 2009 and since you will apply for your perm LC before June 2008, you are eligible for atleast 1 year H-1B renewals.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
Thank you for your quick reply 'loudoggs'... of course it helps and it raise my confidence on the IV group....
I've actually just e-mailed the new employer attorney in order to evaluate the possibility of filling on a different employment-based category. Do you think I will be able to evaluate if I fit on EB-2 rather than my current category EB-3?
Comparing employers (IT field) the new one is offering a more up-to-date technology and improved package but I am so attached to my current one...
Is your new employer filing your GC under EB-2? If the answer is yes, then you should definitely take the new job and re-file GC and not worry about your EB-3 perm that is pending.
If your new employer is going to file under EB-3, then you have to evaluate which job is better for you (as far as pay, position etc.). If you think the new job is much better than what you have now, then I think you should still go for it. Your PD is very recent and a PD of Aug 2007 and a PD of (say) Feb/Mar 2008 has approximately the same value (according to me).
You have a valid H-1B until June 2009 and since you will apply for your perm LC before June 2008, you are eligible for atleast 1 year H-1B renewals.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
Thank you for your quick reply 'loudoggs'... of course it helps and it raise my confidence on the IV group....
I've actually just e-mailed the new employer attorney in order to evaluate the possibility of filling on a different employment-based category. Do you think I will be able to evaluate if I fit on EB-2 rather than my current category EB-3?
Comparing employers (IT field) the new one is offering a more up-to-date technology and improved package but I am so attached to my current one...
girlfriend Ultrasonography of Atrial
anindya1234
06-01 02:39 PM
I dont know about others but for me stuck with the same compay for 5 years. I really want to move on !!
Everybody has the same problem buddy
Everybody has the same problem buddy
hairstyles +gallbladder+ultrasound
sunny1000
04-20 03:09 PM
I-94 also does not have the date written
In that case, here is the relevant Q&A in the www.cbp.gov website. Hope it helps:
Q: How do I correct an Arrival-Departure Record reflecting an incorrect admission classification, biographical information or period of admission?
A: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will review and issue the necessary documents to remedy errors recorded on the Arrival-Departure Record at the time of entry to the United States relating to improper non-immigrant classification, inaccurate biographical information or incorrect period of admission, if appropriate.
Any designated deferred inspection location or CBP office located within an international airport should be able to assist you, regardless of where the actual document was issued. In many instances, the location of your final destination where the discrepancy will be resolved may not be the port of your first arrival into the United States. Travelers are encouraged to contact sites not located within an international airport to establish an appointment, if necessary. Mail-in procedures are not available.
Currently, there is not an approved form to request the correction of inaccurate information recorded on the CBP Form I-94 or I-95 at the time of entry into the United States. You will need to bring the questionable CBP Form I-94 or I-95 and documentation to support the claim that the form was not properly annotated. For example, present a passport and visa to justify an incorrect visa classification or an approved petition to support an incorrect admission period. A fee will not be assessed.
The CBP offices within the international airports and deferred inspection locations are only authorized to correct errors that occurred at the time of arrival. Requests to replace the CBP Form I-94 or I-95 that has been lost, stolen or mutilated must be filed with USCIS.
Authorized stays that were limited at the port of first arrival by supervisory authorization as noted on the reverse side of the CBP Form I-94 will not be corrected. Under these circumstances, you will be required to file an Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status, Form I-539, with USCIS.
In that case, here is the relevant Q&A in the www.cbp.gov website. Hope it helps:
Q: How do I correct an Arrival-Departure Record reflecting an incorrect admission classification, biographical information or period of admission?
A: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will review and issue the necessary documents to remedy errors recorded on the Arrival-Departure Record at the time of entry to the United States relating to improper non-immigrant classification, inaccurate biographical information or incorrect period of admission, if appropriate.
Any designated deferred inspection location or CBP office located within an international airport should be able to assist you, regardless of where the actual document was issued. In many instances, the location of your final destination where the discrepancy will be resolved may not be the port of your first arrival into the United States. Travelers are encouraged to contact sites not located within an international airport to establish an appointment, if necessary. Mail-in procedures are not available.
Currently, there is not an approved form to request the correction of inaccurate information recorded on the CBP Form I-94 or I-95 at the time of entry into the United States. You will need to bring the questionable CBP Form I-94 or I-95 and documentation to support the claim that the form was not properly annotated. For example, present a passport and visa to justify an incorrect visa classification or an approved petition to support an incorrect admission period. A fee will not be assessed.
The CBP offices within the international airports and deferred inspection locations are only authorized to correct errors that occurred at the time of arrival. Requests to replace the CBP Form I-94 or I-95 that has been lost, stolen or mutilated must be filed with USCIS.
Authorized stays that were limited at the port of first arrival by supervisory authorization as noted on the reverse side of the CBP Form I-94 will not be corrected. Under these circumstances, you will be required to file an Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status, Form I-539, with USCIS.
ash27
07-17 02:55 PM
Guys,
We need to ignore postings from Rockford. He is just trying to spread unnecessary rumors to gain attention. What a shame
we really have to be morons to take anynonymous comments at face-value.
or did you post the comments yourself and like the attention?
We need to ignore postings from Rockford. He is just trying to spread unnecessary rumors to gain attention. What a shame
we really have to be morons to take anynonymous comments at face-value.
or did you post the comments yourself and like the attention?
buehler
11-20 11:25 AM
Hmm interesting - I can smell CIR coffee brewing.
EB folks - brace for a bumpy ride
Secretaries are from the Executive Branch and are responsible for the execution of the laws and are not directly responsible for the creation of the laws. So we could expect Memos that are more favorable to us but I wouldn't hold my breath over CIR yet.
EB folks - brace for a bumpy ride
Secretaries are from the Executive Branch and are responsible for the execution of the laws and are not directly responsible for the creation of the laws. So we could expect Memos that are more favorable to us but I wouldn't hold my breath over CIR yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment