anil
04-02 11:20 AM
I would rather fight it here without sending her to India (it happened to me). If you (primary) are living here legally with all your past H1's available in hand, then you hire a gora lawyer. Don't go to Murthy or Rajiv Khanna, they charge hefty. Basically what you need to do is -
1) Your wife writes an affidavit on legal note explaining the whole story that she forgot, but has been maintaining the status legally until then. (the lawyer will help you with this). You have to build a case they you are living legally with a good intent but just forgot to renew...
2) Attach all H1/H4 copies of yourself and her with I-94.
3) Fill in H4 renewal application
3) Have the lawyer send all paperwork it to INS asap
When INS sees the legal note from attorney, they understand the case is legitimate and mostly approve her H4 renewal. This is what I did when it happened to my wife, and it got approved. However we delayed by 2 weeks. Worst case, you would fight the case in a federal court to prove your innocence, and they just approve it then.
1) Your wife writes an affidavit on legal note explaining the whole story that she forgot, but has been maintaining the status legally until then. (the lawyer will help you with this). You have to build a case they you are living legally with a good intent but just forgot to renew...
2) Attach all H1/H4 copies of yourself and her with I-94.
3) Fill in H4 renewal application
3) Have the lawyer send all paperwork it to INS asap
When INS sees the legal note from attorney, they understand the case is legitimate and mostly approve her H4 renewal. This is what I did when it happened to my wife, and it got approved. However we delayed by 2 weeks. Worst case, you would fight the case in a federal court to prove your innocence, and they just approve it then.
wallpaper spiderman 3 movie pictures.
mdipi
10-28 05:03 PM
i dont have a cgi bin....
sweet_jungle
10-06 12:08 AM
I am also interested in this topic. My wife is working curently using OPT. But, she is waiting for EAD also. So, once 485 EAD comes, she will be in similar situation.
Lawyer has suggested using 485 EAD once it comes.
Anyway, for travelling, AP has to be used. Once you travel on AP and come back, you cannot continue working using OPT. You have to use 485 EAD. So, it is better to switch to 485 EAD to avoid confusion.
I am planning to keep her on OPT till Dec 31. It will make our tax filing easier next year. From January, she can switch to 485 EAD and pay social security tax.
Let me know if you can some concrete info on this.
Is it possible that we get cuaght by IRS audit since I wonder how safe it is to NOT pay social security tax after you have filed 485? I was reading the other thread about IRS audit and am a bit worried.
Lawyer has suggested using 485 EAD once it comes.
Anyway, for travelling, AP has to be used. Once you travel on AP and come back, you cannot continue working using OPT. You have to use 485 EAD. So, it is better to switch to 485 EAD to avoid confusion.
I am planning to keep her on OPT till Dec 31. It will make our tax filing easier next year. From January, she can switch to 485 EAD and pay social security tax.
Let me know if you can some concrete info on this.
Is it possible that we get cuaght by IRS audit since I wonder how safe it is to NOT pay social security tax after you have filed 485? I was reading the other thread about IRS audit and am a bit worried.
2011 full Spiderman 3 movie
Googler
02-14 05:22 PM
Great ruling. The analysis is totally applicable to AOS. Moreover, the government admitted that it was wrong in recent memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
Good point about the recent memo -- happily there are multiple pdfs of it floating around so they can't make that language disappear -- and and immigration judge granting AOS. Those two points should do.
About "name check" nowhere found in laws -- i.e no language in some obscure subsection -- I just want to make sure that the interpretation is ironclad for AOS, we know it is for naturalization.
Yep, I *love* the "unlikely event" part.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
Good point about the recent memo -- happily there are multiple pdfs of it floating around so they can't make that language disappear -- and and immigration judge granting AOS. Those two points should do.
About "name check" nowhere found in laws -- i.e no language in some obscure subsection -- I just want to make sure that the interpretation is ironclad for AOS, we know it is for naturalization.
Yep, I *love* the "unlikely event" part.
more...
thakkarbhav
08-20 09:10 AM
No. Never heard about this type of situation. Can you call customer service center to find out what is going on. Also you are current so something should come on your way....
Munna Bhai
01-08 03:50 PM
Here is the situation, they already got Australia visa stamped and would like to make a honest visit to US before leaving for Australia, nothing hidden. So how to Convince VO.
more...
waiting4gc02
11-15 03:30 PM
Guys:
I am currently working through a Consulting company at a client location.
Now, if I were to join the "same" client location as an employee after the 180 day completion of having filed I-485, what are the things that I need to keep in touch before I make this transition.
I do have EAD that is valid till Sep'08. Do I need to tell the client company that my I-485 is pending and that I can work using EAD or should I apply as anyone who would apply for the position without any strings...!!!
I would really appreciate if you guys can let me know any nuiances that I need to be aware of and any caveats that exist in this situation.
I appreciate your time and good luck to all to get the GC as soon as possible.
Thanks
I am currently working through a Consulting company at a client location.
Now, if I were to join the "same" client location as an employee after the 180 day completion of having filed I-485, what are the things that I need to keep in touch before I make this transition.
I do have EAD that is valid till Sep'08. Do I need to tell the client company that my I-485 is pending and that I can work using EAD or should I apply as anyone who would apply for the position without any strings...!!!
I would really appreciate if you guys can let me know any nuiances that I need to be aware of and any caveats that exist in this situation.
I appreciate your time and good luck to all to get the GC as soon as possible.
Thanks
2010 Spider-Man 3
eb_retrogession
03-23 01:01 PM
Guys,
Can we contact Center for Community Change for our cause ?
I watched their Excecutive Director Deepak Bhargava on CPSAN yesterday on
a program of Immigrant Rights.
http://www.communitychange.org/
Sent out a note to Deepak. Will keep the thread posted with any updates....thanks
Can we contact Center for Community Change for our cause ?
I watched their Excecutive Director Deepak Bhargava on CPSAN yesterday on
a program of Immigrant Rights.
http://www.communitychange.org/
Sent out a note to Deepak. Will keep the thread posted with any updates....thanks
more...
diptam
06-23 01:15 AM
Generating receipt may take 7-8 days but if they open it
Monday June 25th they may reject it saying its not current .... ??
That rejection will probably come back after 7 days too :-)
Interesting question. Since they are taking 8-10 days or more to generate receipts perhaps we can send papers in now and hope they generate a receipt in the first week of July.
Monday June 25th they may reject it saying its not current .... ??
That rejection will probably come back after 7 days too :-)
Interesting question. Since they are taking 8-10 days or more to generate receipts perhaps we can send papers in now and hope they generate a receipt in the first week of July.
hair Free Spiderman 3 movie,
javadeveloper
08-31 09:36 AM
Please do not spread a bad word about Indian companies. Infact 90% of us are working for Indian companies and we very much know we can not go with others due to the fact that experience or openness or waterver the reasons I don't like to mention here. I hope you can understand my request. Thanks.
Why Not?? 80% of Desi Companies do illegal things like
1.charging for H1B
2.charging for GC
3.Not keeping employees on payroll
4.Not paying on Bench
All companies are required to follow the rules/law
Why Not?? 80% of Desi Companies do illegal things like
1.charging for H1B
2.charging for GC
3.Not keeping employees on payroll
4.Not paying on Bench
All companies are required to follow the rules/law
more...
pappu
04-27 01:13 PM
$1.5 Billion in income taxes, is the amount the 64,000 new H1bs pay every year and I assume a similar or larger sales tax.
I'm not even thinking of the remaining 500,000+ people in the immigration queue
Unless there is a formal document like Unauthorized Immigrants Pay Taxes, Too | Immigration Policy Center (http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/unauthorized-immigrants-pay-taxes-too)
http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/Tax_Contributions_by_Unauthorized_Immigrants_04181 1.pdf
a post has no significance. If you wish to work on such a study, it would be make the arguments stronger. It is something some volunteers can take up as an action item.
I'm not even thinking of the remaining 500,000+ people in the immigration queue
Unless there is a formal document like Unauthorized Immigrants Pay Taxes, Too | Immigration Policy Center (http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/unauthorized-immigrants-pay-taxes-too)
http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/Tax_Contributions_by_Unauthorized_Immigrants_04181 1.pdf
a post has no significance. If you wish to work on such a study, it would be make the arguments stronger. It is something some volunteers can take up as an action item.
hot Spider-Man 3 Official Movie
indianabacklog
08-06 07:37 AM
I-140 was approved on october 08, 2002
and it was filed on may 20, 2003
i dnt think that my dad filed I-485.
Since the I140 was approved in October 2002 and the visa became current in August 2003, from my knowledge you had until August 2004 to file the I824. The CSPA seems to be very clear you have one year from the time the visa BECAME current so you would have been one year late in applying.
Be assured I know this aging out thing is awful my family is a victim of it too. I see no pleasure watching others suffer.
and it was filed on may 20, 2003
i dnt think that my dad filed I-485.
Since the I140 was approved in October 2002 and the visa became current in August 2003, from my knowledge you had until August 2004 to file the I824. The CSPA seems to be very clear you have one year from the time the visa BECAME current so you would have been one year late in applying.
Be assured I know this aging out thing is awful my family is a victim of it too. I see no pleasure watching others suffer.
more...
house And it#39;s a long, long movie
polapragada
02-17 11:43 AM
we worked on this op-ed article and Nitin did exceptional hard work and we can see the results here -
Hindustan Times Article about Discriminatory Amendment
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=ViewsSectionPage&id=26183b7b-d7fe-4db4-a081-f54262ab1fd7&MatchID1=4924&TeamID1=4&TeamID2=2&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1244&PrimaryID=4924&Headline=Anti-immigrant+song
OR
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23776&page=1000
We encourage all members to send us op-ed articles and will do our best to get them published in the media.
thanks for your efforts
Hindustan Times Article about Discriminatory Amendment
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=ViewsSectionPage&id=26183b7b-d7fe-4db4-a081-f54262ab1fd7&MatchID1=4924&TeamID1=4&TeamID2=2&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1244&PrimaryID=4924&Headline=Anti-immigrant+song
OR
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23776&page=1000
We encourage all members to send us op-ed articles and will do our best to get them published in the media.
thanks for your efforts
tattoo Spiderman 3.jpg
salthepal
10-29 04:53 PM
No point worrying over past. Go ahed and file a AR11 ASAP to make sure from now on USCIS has your updated address. In case in future this becomes an issue then contact a lawyer and try to resolve it.
I am in the same situation. I moved twice. Should I file 2 Ar-11's now? or only one? If only one, should I put my previous address as the one that I didn't file an Ar-11 for?
I am in the same situation. I moved twice. Should I file 2 Ar-11's now? or only one? If only one, should I put my previous address as the one that I didn't file an Ar-11 for?
more...
pictures Sony PlayStation 3 Bundles in
mariano
07-29 03:54 AM
Hi!
My employer has changed the conditions of my employment since we mutually agreed to start the greencard process (reduced benefits, increased my out-of-pocket expenses, did not give yearly increase and bonuses promised at the beginning of my employment). I am now unable to make ends meet with my current salary and there is no sign I will get an increase soon. Will this constitute as valid reason if I quit my job in, say, 1 month from receiving the greencard?
Also, the Senior position specified in the I-140 is not available right now. Do I have the right to claim it, now that the greencard had been approved? If they won't give it to me, will this be a valid reason to quit and not jeopardize my GC with the USCIS?
Please advise. Thank you!
Hi!
My employer has changed the conditions of my employment after we mutually agreed to start the greencard process (reduced benefits, increased my out-of-pocket expenses, did not give yearly increase and bonuses promised at the beginning of my employment). I am now unable to make ends meet with my current salary and there is no sign I will get an increase soon. Will this constitute as valid reason if I quit my job in, say, 1 month from receiving the greencard?
Also, the Senior position specified in the I-140 is not available right now. Do I have the right to claim it, now that the greencard had been approved? If they won't give it to me, will this be a valid reason to quit and not jeopardize my GC with the USCIS?
Please advise. Thank you!
My employer has changed the conditions of my employment since we mutually agreed to start the greencard process (reduced benefits, increased my out-of-pocket expenses, did not give yearly increase and bonuses promised at the beginning of my employment). I am now unable to make ends meet with my current salary and there is no sign I will get an increase soon. Will this constitute as valid reason if I quit my job in, say, 1 month from receiving the greencard?
Also, the Senior position specified in the I-140 is not available right now. Do I have the right to claim it, now that the greencard had been approved? If they won't give it to me, will this be a valid reason to quit and not jeopardize my GC with the USCIS?
Please advise. Thank you!
Hi!
My employer has changed the conditions of my employment after we mutually agreed to start the greencard process (reduced benefits, increased my out-of-pocket expenses, did not give yearly increase and bonuses promised at the beginning of my employment). I am now unable to make ends meet with my current salary and there is no sign I will get an increase soon. Will this constitute as valid reason if I quit my job in, say, 1 month from receiving the greencard?
Also, the Senior position specified in the I-140 is not available right now. Do I have the right to claim it, now that the greencard had been approved? If they won't give it to me, will this be a valid reason to quit and not jeopardize my GC with the USCIS?
Please advise. Thank you!
dresses Spider-Man 3 Movie Premiere
gc_mania_03
06-24 10:00 AM
Even I am going back to school full-time with my wife on EAD with AOS pending. As far as I know there are no issues. If there are any specifics in your case, just consult your attorney.
I remember in one of the calls with attorney[organized by IV], I was told I don't have to worry about producing pay-stubs.
-gc_mania_03
I remember in one of the calls with attorney[organized by IV], I was told I don't have to worry about producing pay-stubs.
-gc_mania_03
more...
makeup Spiderman 3 BK toys
snathan
02-11 12:20 AM
Please contribute
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
girlfriend All Movie Zone » Spider-Man 3…
loveiv
07-08 03:14 PM
Hi All,
Give me all your valuable suggestions for the below case:
- Got a full time offer for my wife who is working on H1 and has EAD too.
- She decided to transfer her H1 instead of using EAD.
- My wife has sent all the necessary documentation to the lawyer.
- Mean while, we got I-485 approved. As per lawyer, upon 485 approved, H1b and EAD is no longer valid.
- We have not received I 485 approval notice through mail yet. We just have email from immigration
Our question is on what should be the valuable document that can be shown as eligibility proof to work as we have not received I-485 mail and cards yet.
Another question is: Can we visit local USCIS office for the temporary green card stamp based on the email got from immigration.
Your response is highly appreciated.
Congratulations.
One thing I did not understand is 'Urgent Please' in your thread heading.
I don't see any urgency here, unless you added to draw everybody's attention.
Give me all your valuable suggestions for the below case:
- Got a full time offer for my wife who is working on H1 and has EAD too.
- She decided to transfer her H1 instead of using EAD.
- My wife has sent all the necessary documentation to the lawyer.
- Mean while, we got I-485 approved. As per lawyer, upon 485 approved, H1b and EAD is no longer valid.
- We have not received I 485 approval notice through mail yet. We just have email from immigration
Our question is on what should be the valuable document that can be shown as eligibility proof to work as we have not received I-485 mail and cards yet.
Another question is: Can we visit local USCIS office for the temporary green card stamp based on the email got from immigration.
Your response is highly appreciated.
Congratulations.
One thing I did not understand is 'Urgent Please' in your thread heading.
I don't see any urgency here, unless you added to draw everybody's attention.
hairstyles Spider-man 3 content
jkays94
05-17 07:33 PM
My lawyers and I have attempted to appeal the decision, however our attempt has been futile: our request for appeal has been denied.
The judge presiding over my case will be a United States citizen - it would be like telling a child to kill his/her parent... it simply cannot happen! If I were to sue the United States of America, I would be fighting an uphill battle and risk deportation if I were to lose.
Did you appeal your case to the Board of Immigration Appeals ? Have you sought the intervention of congressional offices ? Congressional offices can ask questions and get answers which you otherwise would never get. What status did you file under ? EB category ? etc
Judges in the US do not discriminate on national origin or immigration status. There have been cases where legal and illegal immigrants convicted of crimes have sued the US and won key phases of their cases even when the cases were appealed. Examples of such are Jogi v. Voges and :
In two recent decisions, the Fourth Circuit reversed lower court rulings that had dismissed law suits filed by two Colombian nationals under the Alien Tort Statute. Both lawsuits sought $2 million in damages on the grounds that the arresting authorities had failed to advise them of their right to consular notification and communication.
While this were not immigration cases, the following case might even demonstrate that Judges are there to uphold the law without fear or favor. In this particular case, a court ordered a US consulate to adjudicate a visa application in 60 days when the applicants had been kept waiting for over 4 years. Mind you the individual was outside the US and still sued and won :
Mandamus Granted Against U.S. Embassy in Moscow in 4-Year Wait for Visa (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=16767)
A District Court in California grants mandamus against the U.S. Embassy in Moscow in an immigrant visa case, finding that 4 years is an unreasonable time for an application to be pending and that a U.S. petitioner has standing to bring a mandamus action against an overseas consulate in a visa application case. Courtesy of Kenneth White.
Finally, I am not an attorney, but I strong suggest pursuing the congressional office route, if need be, use both your congressman(woman) and senator's office to get to the bottom of what appears to be an obvious error. You might want to schedule a meeting with them rather than discuss the issue over the phone and provide all copies of correspondence.
The judge presiding over my case will be a United States citizen - it would be like telling a child to kill his/her parent... it simply cannot happen! If I were to sue the United States of America, I would be fighting an uphill battle and risk deportation if I were to lose.
Did you appeal your case to the Board of Immigration Appeals ? Have you sought the intervention of congressional offices ? Congressional offices can ask questions and get answers which you otherwise would never get. What status did you file under ? EB category ? etc
Judges in the US do not discriminate on national origin or immigration status. There have been cases where legal and illegal immigrants convicted of crimes have sued the US and won key phases of their cases even when the cases were appealed. Examples of such are Jogi v. Voges and :
In two recent decisions, the Fourth Circuit reversed lower court rulings that had dismissed law suits filed by two Colombian nationals under the Alien Tort Statute. Both lawsuits sought $2 million in damages on the grounds that the arresting authorities had failed to advise them of their right to consular notification and communication.
While this were not immigration cases, the following case might even demonstrate that Judges are there to uphold the law without fear or favor. In this particular case, a court ordered a US consulate to adjudicate a visa application in 60 days when the applicants had been kept waiting for over 4 years. Mind you the individual was outside the US and still sued and won :
Mandamus Granted Against U.S. Embassy in Moscow in 4-Year Wait for Visa (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=16767)
A District Court in California grants mandamus against the U.S. Embassy in Moscow in an immigrant visa case, finding that 4 years is an unreasonable time for an application to be pending and that a U.S. petitioner has standing to bring a mandamus action against an overseas consulate in a visa application case. Courtesy of Kenneth White.
Finally, I am not an attorney, but I strong suggest pursuing the congressional office route, if need be, use both your congressman(woman) and senator's office to get to the bottom of what appears to be an obvious error. You might want to schedule a meeting with them rather than discuss the issue over the phone and provide all copies of correspondence.
phillyag
07-17 07:24 PM
I heard something to this effect. Is this correct ?
Ann Ruben
07-23 11:37 PM
The AC21 determination of whether a new job is in "the same or similar occupation" is made based on a comparison of the new job duties and those set forth on the original labor certification application. Job titles are not controlling. So, you need to have a copy of your original LC application and then compare the job description it contains to the duties of the new position.
USCIS has not provide much guidance on what will or will not qualify as the "same or similar" occupational classification. What little guidance exists comes from a 2005 memo to Service Centers from Michael Aytes:
"Question 3. What is “same or similar” occupational classification for purposes of I-140 portability?
Answer: When making a determination if the new employment is the “same or similar” occupational classification in comparison to the employment in the initial I-140, adjudicators should consider the following factors:
A. Description of the job duties contained in the ETA 750A or the initial I-140 and the job duties of the new employment to determine if they are the “same or similar” occupational classification.
B. The DOT code and/or SOC code assigned to the initial I-140 employment for petitions that have a certified ETA 750A or consider what DOT and/or SOC code is appropriate for the position for an initial I-140 that did not require a certified ETA 750A. Then consider the DOT code and/or SOC code, whichever is appropriate for the new position to make a determination of “same or similar” occupational classification.
C. A substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage. (See Question 5 of this section for further clarification).
Question 5. Should service centers or district officers use a difference in the wage offered on the approved labor certification and initial I-140, and the new employment as basis for denial in adjustment portability cases?
Answer: No. As noted above the relevant inquiry is if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification to the alien’s I-140 employment. A difference in the wage offered on the approved labor certification, initial I-140 and the new employment cannot be used as a basis of a denial. However, a substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage may be taken into consideration as a factor in determining if the new employment is 'same or similar.'"
The bottom line is that in order to establish that your new position is in the same or similar occupational classification, you must first compare the specific job duties described in the original application for labor certification to the specific job duties of the new position. Nothing from USCIS specifically addresses what percentage of identical job duties would be required, but the closer to 100% the better. Job titles do not matter, job duties do. Next, you need to find the DOT USDOL/Office of Administrative Law Judges Home Page and/or SOC Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) System codes written on your original LC/I-140 and compare the occupational descriptions for those codes to the job duties of your new position. USCIS has never indicated what percentage of identical/similar job duties will suffice in either of the comparisons. Most likely it must be more than 50%, and the closer to 100% the better. Finally, a substantial difference in salary is not determinative, but, in a close case may lead to a denial. To combat this, reference can be made to the DOL's Online Wage Library FLCDataCenter.com current wage survey for the occupation. If the new salary is within the range indicated for the original SOC occupation, you can make a strong argument that the increase is due to the passage of time and not to a change in occupational classification.
USCIS has not provide much guidance on what will or will not qualify as the "same or similar" occupational classification. What little guidance exists comes from a 2005 memo to Service Centers from Michael Aytes:
"Question 3. What is “same or similar” occupational classification for purposes of I-140 portability?
Answer: When making a determination if the new employment is the “same or similar” occupational classification in comparison to the employment in the initial I-140, adjudicators should consider the following factors:
A. Description of the job duties contained in the ETA 750A or the initial I-140 and the job duties of the new employment to determine if they are the “same or similar” occupational classification.
B. The DOT code and/or SOC code assigned to the initial I-140 employment for petitions that have a certified ETA 750A or consider what DOT and/or SOC code is appropriate for the position for an initial I-140 that did not require a certified ETA 750A. Then consider the DOT code and/or SOC code, whichever is appropriate for the new position to make a determination of “same or similar” occupational classification.
C. A substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage. (See Question 5 of this section for further clarification).
Question 5. Should service centers or district officers use a difference in the wage offered on the approved labor certification and initial I-140, and the new employment as basis for denial in adjustment portability cases?
Answer: No. As noted above the relevant inquiry is if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification to the alien’s I-140 employment. A difference in the wage offered on the approved labor certification, initial I-140 and the new employment cannot be used as a basis of a denial. However, a substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage may be taken into consideration as a factor in determining if the new employment is 'same or similar.'"
The bottom line is that in order to establish that your new position is in the same or similar occupational classification, you must first compare the specific job duties described in the original application for labor certification to the specific job duties of the new position. Nothing from USCIS specifically addresses what percentage of identical job duties would be required, but the closer to 100% the better. Job titles do not matter, job duties do. Next, you need to find the DOT USDOL/Office of Administrative Law Judges Home Page and/or SOC Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) System codes written on your original LC/I-140 and compare the occupational descriptions for those codes to the job duties of your new position. USCIS has never indicated what percentage of identical/similar job duties will suffice in either of the comparisons. Most likely it must be more than 50%, and the closer to 100% the better. Finally, a substantial difference in salary is not determinative, but, in a close case may lead to a denial. To combat this, reference can be made to the DOL's Online Wage Library FLCDataCenter.com current wage survey for the occupation. If the new salary is within the range indicated for the original SOC occupation, you can make a strong argument that the increase is due to the passage of time and not to a change in occupational classification.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий