Employers control on I-140

A

aws

Registered Users (C)
Folks,

Is it true that beyond 6 months of filing, the employer looses control over your I-140 application while it is pending? I know for sure that they can revoke it once it is approved, but is not sure if they can withdraw it if it is pending for well over 6+ months.

Pl. share your thoughts, thanks!
 
aws said:
Folks,

Is it true that beyond 6 months of filing, the employer looses control over your I-140 application while it is pending? I know for sure that they can revoke it once it is approved, but is not sure if they can withdraw it if it is pending for well over 6+ months.

Pl. share your thoughts, thanks!
Click to expand...

Employer can revoke or withdraw the I-140 whenever they want. The only caveate is that after 6 months of I-485 filing (not I-140), employee can invoke AC21 law and switch companies. Now, some say I-140 approval is not required to do this, but I feel the safer approach is to have an approved I-140. It is then that the employer 'loses' control over I-140. He may still send a letter to revoke, but if the employee has switched to a similar job and sent a letter to CIS, then CIS will not cancel the I-140.
 
I know for sure until both of following conditions happen, employer has full control over I-140

1. I-140 has to be approved
2. I-485 has to be pending over 180 calender days from Receipt date of the same(I-485)

If any of the above conditions are not met, employer can withdraw or revoke your case.

Also their is no law that you need to inform about change of job to BCIS. It is always better to do that to avoid an RFE. Otherwise if employer tries to withdraw after 180 days of 485 pending & I-140 approved, BCIS will generate an RFE for you and at that time you can let them know about your new job



----
Employer can revoke or withdraw the I-140 whenever they want. The only caveate is that after 6 months of I-485 filing (not I-140), employee can invoke AC21 law and switch companies. Now, some say I-140 approval is not required to do this, but I feel the safer approach is to have an approved I-140. It is then that the employer 'loses' control over I-140. He may still send a letter to revoke, but if the employee has switched to a similar job and sent a letter to CIS, then CIS will not cancel the I-140.
 
sanshriv said:
I
Also their is no law that you need to inform about change of job to BCIS. It is always better to do that to avoid an RFE. Otherwise if employer tries to withdraw after 180 days of 485 pending & I-140 approved, BCIS will generate an RFE for you and at that time you can let them know about your new job
Click to expand...

Remember I-140 is employers petetion. So if the employer decides to withdraw the I-140, the RFE or NOID will go to the lawyer or company. Now the lawyer or company will not inform you, so the I-140 could get revoked without your knowledge.Therefore I feel it is always better to be pro-active and send AC21 letter rather than risk the withdrawal from an angry/disgrunted ex-employer !
 
This issue has really become important with delay in 140,which is getting really frustrating.They were going to issue new Clarification about AC21 ,but it never came.With 140 taking sometimes close to a year,the basic purpose of AC21 is getting defeated.All this is really crazy Looks like NSC is approving 140's at the rate of 1 per week.This week was OctFiler 's lucky week.Who will it be that next one.....,others are doomed....:mad:
 
gcbandwagon,

you really stole my words!!

i am in that situation, where I have to wash-off hands of this new excellent job due to the fact that my I-140 is pending at NSC since 10/21/03.
Use of AC21 without I-140 is a risky move and I don't know how long will it take before it gets approved..... :confused:
 
gcbandwagon said:
.All this is really crazy Looks like NSC is approving 140's at the rate of 1 per week.:mad:
Click to expand...

I didn't know this.WOW, they are really working very hard to reduce the backlogs.
 
They are working very hard to reduce their backlog.

However the backlog in the Apeals court is going to get huge soon. It already increased by two months. I always wonder why we only see how many aprovals from the service centers. What about how many denials.

Sorry about being pessimistic today, I guess is not my day.

Do not worry though, somebody yesterday said that "Hope is on the way". I want to think that applies to us, legal immigrants, as well.
 
Sorry, but don't agree

aws said:
gcbandwagon,

you really stole my words!!

i am in that situation, where I have to wash-off hands of this new excellent job due to the fact that my I-140 is pending at NSC since 10/21/03.
Use of AC21 without I-140 is a risky move and I don't know how long will it take before it gets approved..... :confused:
Click to expand...

I wouldn't agree 100% on the fact that 140 needs to be approved to applied AC21.
I talked to 2 different immigration lawyers and both agreed that this was not a requirement and 180 days for 485 was.

Is it "cleaner" with a 140 approval: Sure. Is it impossible without one: That's where I do not agree...

Elnegro
 
elnegro,

could you share further with us on where or which attorneys assured you that I-140 approval is NOT required for using AC21 once I-485 is pending for 180+ days?

Due to the controversy surrounding this issue, I am almost washing-off hands of a dream job due to my I-140 pending since 10/21/2003
(i have posted this thread as a reply in another thread just to make sure you read it, my apologies if you find it annoying!)

thanks.
 
sertra2002 said:
Remember I-140 is employers petetion. So if the employer decides to withdraw the I-140, the RFE or NOID will go to the lawyer or company. Now the lawyer or company will not inform you, so the I-140 could get revoked without your knowledge.Therefore I feel it is always better to be pro-active and send AC21 letter rather than risk the withdrawal from an angry/disgrunted ex-employer !
Click to expand...

Would the 140 status be updated on the site online in such a case?
 
aws said:
elnegro,

could you share further with us on where or which attorneys assured you that I-140 approval is NOT required for using AC21 once I-485 is pending for 180+ days?

Due to the controversy surrounding this issue, I am almost washing-off hands of a dream job due to my I-140 pending since 10/21/2003
(i have posted this thread as a reply in another thread just to make sure you read it, my apologies if you find it annoying!)

thanks.
Click to expand...

This is what I have found,

Although the AC21 law itself only requires that the I-485 have been pending for at least 180 days, and does not require that the I-140 petition be approved for the I-485 applicant to enjoy portability, the USCIS position is that the I-140 petition should be approved. This new processing development creates significant legal and policy issues since the USCIS, by its own interpretation and actions, may have nullified the benefit of AC21 portability and violated the intent of Congress.
©MurthyDotCom
 
I-140 aproval and AC21 Portability

Guys,

From what I understand, the AC21 law applies more to the non-concurrent cases, where the I-485 is applied after I-140 has been aproved already and hence INS never worried about I-140 (since it was already aproved)

quick question: Does anyone knows if Ac21 was implemented before the I-140 and I-485 concurrent filing was allowed ? if that is the case then it is pretty obvious that I-140 aproval is a must for using AC21.

on the other hand, this could be a big Loop hole too, and with a good attorney and lot of money, you might even use AC21 wthout I-140 aprovals

just my thought, I could be wrong..

nadeemrasheed said:
This is what I have found,

Although the AC21 law itself only requires that the I-485 have been pending for at least 180 days, and does not require that the I-140 petition be approved for the I-485 applicant to enjoy portability, the USCIS position is that the I-140 petition should be approved. This new processing development creates significant legal and policy issues since the USCIS, by its own interpretation and actions, may have nullified the benefit of AC21 portability and violated the intent of Congress.
©MurthyDotCom
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top