AC21 in murthy

They have AILA meetings and INS meetings and a bunch of lawyers participate it

I always wonder what they come out of this! Don\'t they ask INS: it they are or aren\'t approving
cases that are that are 180 days old and in the similar position? I am sure they don\'t take a week
off and go just for fun to these meetings. What is going on here? I want to hear what INS
officials answer on these prudent questions.

The Texas Service Center confirmed that I-485s (Application for Adjustment
                of Status) will be approved based upon employment which is the same or
                similar to that described in the labor certification, provided the case has
                been pending for at least 180 days. They confirmed that no new I-140 is
                required and that field offices have been instructed accordingly. Previously,
                there had been some misunderstanding on this subject.

So I-140 can be new and I-485 needs to be updated. Re-read above and make sense out of it.
To me you need to notify mandatorily once you used AC21 portability.
 
There are a couple problems but it all comse down to there are no official regulations

AILA has frequent meetings with all INS service centers separately, INS HQ, USDOL, the US Department of State, individual consulates, State SESAs, and other agencies. All of these different sources may say different things. A good example is the US Congress, just because a congressperson makes a statement saying that he believe that a final law will say a certain thing doesn\'t necessarily make it so. INS is the same way, just because one official, even a fairly high ranking one, says that the final regulations will say a certain thing, or permit cetain things in cetain circumstance, doesn\'t necessarily make it so. Also note that the INS guidance that everyone quotes as gospel came out when INS had a different commissioner and before September 11.

There are thousands of people who work in INS and many people create the regulations. Any statement that INS makes at this point is really meaningless from a legal viewpoint and can be changed without warning. Just because one service center director makes a statement clearly does not mean that any other service center will agree and also does not mean that the director will not change his mind at a later date.

Also, officers sometimes disagree with INS HQ guidance and do not follow it. Basically, nobaody can say anything DEFINITE about AC21, cases are being approved (and it appears sometimes denied if you read murthy.com closely) but all that will change when the regulations come out. Things will then become clear and attorneys who have guessed wrong will pull all the erroneous material from their websites, of course, aliens who followed bad guesses will also pay the price through denials (if the final regulations are at all restrictive. Given the recent events with INS and terrorist activities, I personally really doubt that the final regulations will be totally permissive (i.e. that you never have to work for the sponsoring employer at all and can change your intent any time after the I-485 without any problem as long as INS takes more than 180 days to adjudicate the I-485). But who knows, I could be wrong too. Stranger things have happened.

Jim

James D. Mills
Attorney at Law
jdmills@justice.com
732-644-5702
http://www.geocities.com/jamesdmillsesq/
 
It seems like lot of people are being misled by famous websites. Unless one have

to leave by force like layoff or bankruptcy, it is better to stay with the same job. it is not known the portability even works.
Can anybody who has been tracking such case for the past 1 year say what is the percentage of
approvals for 180 portability cases?
Prior AC21 what did INS do, if they inquire about employment verification? Did they flat out denied
I485??
 
Jim, what do you recommend then,

Take a chance after 180 days or notify INS and start through a safe route: like reapply H1b if under 6 year and finds a sponsor, or use
reciprocity if a spouse is working and his or her employter is willing to sponser and go through the
same long process(keeping RD same),
There are clearly just avenues, take a chance and die or just die for those who cannot efficiently
convert to a legal status. Tell me if I am wrong or am I being to pessimistic and not showing a fake smile.
 
nobody knows. everything is in chance. somebody should know for certain

degree of certainty, but nobody wants to be accountable, everybody
is just covering their butt.
 
No Title

Completely agreed with Jim Mills. The current events will drastically alter the final regulation. A good example, although not related to AC21, is the recent proposal to reduce visitor\'s visa to 30 days from 6 months. In current environment, we\'d better exercise a very conservative approach to interpret AC21.
 
Thanks VSCWAITER, but I could be wrong about this too :)

Basically, my advice is to stay with the sponsoring employer at least for 180 days before leaving and then find a job as similar as possible. If the similar prong is met and the person actually works for the sponsoring employer for at least 180 days post filing the I-485, I don\'t see that AC21 would have any meaning at all if this was impermissible.

Of course, the above advice assumes that the person has a choice. If the person is laid off, the company closes down, or the situation with the sponsor becomes unbearable., there is not choice and all that can be done is make sure the similar prong is met and hope for the best.

I certainly would not advise anyone to change employers in less than 180 days unless there was no choice or the person was fully aware that there was a risk to the GC approval.

Jim

James D. Mills
Attorney at Law
jdmills@justice.com
732-644-5702
http://www.geocities.com/jamesdmillsesq/
 
murthy\'s chat last night

check out her chat last night, I think she changed her position on this matter a little bit, maybe it\'s just me
 
consulting firm

Jim,
Can an applicant have his/her own consulting firm in "same or similar position" after 180 days? This is just in case if applicant doesn\'t find a job after getting laid off.
thanks
 
Another good question

I don\'t know for sure. Self employment in this type of situation will not permit labor certification in most cases and therefore prevents GC issuance in any category that requires an LC. I can\'t say for sure whether there will be any restrictions such as this in the final implementing regulations for AC21.

It also seems that there would be a problem with the "similar" requirement unless the person was managing a consulting firm and working as a consultant. If you are the only employee of the firm you would certainly have additional managerial, marketing and administrative duties and INS could make an issue of this and deny.

Jim

James D. Mills
Attorney at Law
http://www.geocities.com/jamesdmillsesq/
 
This question is for Jim

I have completed 6 months from my RD. My Rd is in October. My sponsor company is still surviving but has problems. I work at a client place and my client offered me to join them as an employee. This is a big firm and if I join them it gives me lot more stability. My job responsibilities would be considerably enhanced as supposed to in my LC. What would be your advice ? Thanks in advance. Can I join ? Do you see any risk ?
 
Risk

The risk is that your "job duties would be considerably enhanced", which certainly raises questions regarding the similarity of the 2 positions. Particularly since INS has never really defined the term "similar" in this context.

Jim

James D. Mills
Attorney at Law
http://www.geocities.com/jamesdmillsesq/
 
Thanks Jim.

The only way I see is to interpret that in the way it was in LC. I still work in the software and implement applications. Just that I have more job responsibility now than that was mentioned in the LC. Does it matter if I join a big 5 in certain industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top