140 approved: laid off

One case study, from CP discussion board

Below is cut and pasted from Consular Processing section. It is not clear auther got laid-off or left, but is clear GC is for future job.
-- Chris --

First of all, I would like to thank Mr. Rajeev Khanna for providing this wonderful site. Secondly I would like to thank all of the participants of this site for the tremendous amount of information that has been posted. The site immihelp.com was also useful and I could get all the fillable forms from there.

I was working in US and then shifted to Singapore almost a year back. My company continued GC processing and I successfully completed CP from Mumbai last week.

Things that are clear from my experience is :
1. GC is for a future job and you may be working with another company even in a different country.
2. I-134 need not be notorized, although it is not a big deal to notorize if one is in the U.S.
3. In my case they took DS230I,II, I-134,IRS9003,Birth certificates,Marriage certificate,PCC,Employment offer letter. Nothing more.
4. I was asked where I was working currently and for how long. I told the truth and anyway it was mentioned in DS230-I and I-134.

Documents were colleced by the \'Parsi\' lady and there was no problems. Interview was short and lasted no more than two minutes.
I was very anxious all the days leading upto the interview date, as mine was a different case. But by God\'s grace and the information that this site provided , everything went smoothly. I will be joining my sponsoring company shortly.

Thanks and best of luck to everybody in their endeavour to obtain GC.
 
Of course a GC is for a future job, nobody is arguing that

That is a well settled matter of law. GC is undoubtedly for a future job but the job must really exist and not be completely speculative.

Jim

James D. Mills
Attorney at Law
jdmills@justice,cin
732-644-5702
 
Gking, we could debate the relative need for reform of the immigration system the rest of our lives,

There are definite flaws in AC21 which make it contradictory with the clearly expressed intents of the rest of the immigration code. That\'s why I have always expressed the belief that the implementing regulations (if and when they are published) will be nearly as permissive as many attorneys think they will be. Yes, I realize people are currently getting approvals even after leaving their sponsoring employer within months of I-485 filing but that does not necessarily indicate that the final regulations will be this permissive. For a laid off employee, there will be serious questions regarding the availability of a job and I would not counsel any employer to write a letter saying that a position is immediately available and the person will be rehired when the GC is approved. The fact that the person was laid off clearly indicates that the position is NOT available.

After a GC is approved, INS normally only looks at the case under two situations. The first situation would be if someone complains and INS investigates. This would happen if the employee resigns the day after the GC is issued and the employer complains to INS that the employee did not intend to remain permanently and therefore commited immigration fraud. The second situation would be when the employee (now GC holder) applies for U.S. citizenship. INS then looks into the person\'s entire immigration history and if they find that an immigration benefit was procured by fraud, all immigration status, including the GC, can be revoked and the person deported.
 
extention of this same state.

I got my I140 approved & filed for the I485 with company A, after a week I was laid off,can I wait for EAD & proceed to find job in company B.
Thanks in advance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top