This is regarding thier memo on thier website that USCIS verballly agreed on I-140 portability with it's approval and they are working on a official memo. This is just to verify as other Lawyers are saying that they dont have any clue that CIS is working on any such memo in near future...
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Does any one has a reach to Jenken and Gilchrist Law Firm
- Thread starter Damnit
- Start date
Source: their company website www.jenkens.com
Corporate Headquarters
1445 Ross Avenue
Suite 3200
Dallas, Texas 75202-2799
Main Phone Number: (214) 855-4500
Main Fax Number: (214) 855-4300
Attorney Ms.Tina Sharma's Phone Number:
(202) 326-1516
(202) 326-1555 fax
tsharma@jenkens.com
She is in the Washington DC Branch.
Hope this helps!!!
naanshi
Corporate Headquarters
1445 Ross Avenue
Suite 3200
Dallas, Texas 75202-2799
Main Phone Number: (214) 855-4500
Main Fax Number: (214) 855-4300
Attorney Ms.Tina Sharma's Phone Number:
(202) 326-1516
(202) 326-1555 fax
tsharma@jenkens.com
She is in the Washington DC Branch.
Hope this helps!!!
naanshi
Last edited by a moderator:
coolman said:Actually Jekens are the one handling my case. They have asked to wait till the memo is out.
Do you or they have any idea how long USCIS will take to publish the memo?
Guys, I think there's no point in trying to verify the validity of the "portability before 140 approval" statement anymore. Apparently how a lawyer or immigration officer interpret the AC21 law is a statistical event. What really matters is how USCIS adjudicates this kind of cases in practice. Judging by the articals regarding AC 21 on the 485 boards, the prospect does not appear to be bright. I've read about 485 denials even with 140 approved. It's probably next to impossible to gather accurate statistics on these issues to get a better conclusion. You could always ask your lawyer but whatever advice or data s/he gives you is anecdotal since his clientele is such a minute portion of the vast 140 population. On the other hand, I think we can also forget about a prospect memo. My gut feeling is USCIS's position is an intended strategical ambiguity. They don't want to clearly state a more regic AC21 interpretation which apparently is against the spirit of AC21. Nor do they want to open the flood gate to more problems by publicly adopting a more liberal interpretation.
On this issue, I believe there is no such thing as an "authority". An analogy to this would be trying to find out the weather on a specific date next year. You probably know as much about the topic as your attorney by now.
On this issue, I believe there is no such thing as an "authority". An analogy to this would be trying to find out the weather on a specific date next year. You probably know as much about the topic as your attorney by now.
Last edited by a moderator:
iknowitall
Registered Users (C)
well the article disappeared because they interpreted something that was not official at all and i guess they got some dozens of calls regarding that so.