Filing Issue

[PCee]

No Title

newly saint,
If you don\'t understand some thing doesn\'t mean that it is garbage (by the way I tried to answer to your questions/arguments in your earlier post there)!

Do you know that there are some restrictions on how many H1 employees a company can have w.r.t. other employees if not the employer has to support some expensive programs etc. So based on that (at I-485 stage) and based on changed financial and other sitiations a company CAN argue that they want to hire a person with GC but not with H1! We both know that there is no requirement that GC applicant should be working in GC job prior to GC approval even though the job is available immediately!

 

[GC515]

I filed I-140 in KY, so TSC, got approved and moved to Ohio, filed I485 in NSC, got FP done, no prob

 

 

[newly saint]

PCee

Your arguments are based on "what generally happens" and mine on "the law". INS generally don\'t bother to do lot of questioning, if all the papers are in file, they generally approves the petition. No issue here. But this does not mean that they can not question... Immigration process has become more strict in last 6-7 years and expect it to be more strict in future.

For example, every immigrant and non-immigrant must notify Justice dept. within 10 days of address change ($1000 penalty and/or 6 month jail otherwise). Now, this law has never been enforced. So according to your arguments this law does not exists because it has never been enforced.

As to your example about hiring H1 or GC candidate (I don\'t know where you going with that..). Lets say the employee filed I-485 but does not work for sponsoring employer yet... No problem with this. Then he gets EAD, still does not work for sponsoring employer. Now, INS can question the intent, INS can say that now you have work authorization, why don\'t you go work for the sponsoring company (agreed, company does not want to hire guy on H1 but now there is no H1 involved), if you don\'t, doesn\'t it mean that either the employer does not have immediate opening or the employee does not have intent to work for sponsor company. Sure, there is no requirement to work for sponsor company before GC approval but this goes to prove intent.

 

[sandpa]

just different perspectives

there is no point in arguing.I think it finally boils down to ones own conscience. Some ppl believe in personal ethics and others don\'t when it comes to gaining something. I have seen many ppl ( not all ) on this board who are ready to lie for the sake of GC. In fact they come to the board not for legal advice ( coz that you can get from reading INS statutes ) but for learning ways to deceive the INS. This goes on coz INS ignores most of these cases. i\'m not saying these people are bad ( of course they dont deserve my respect ) coz its their own personal preference and probably GC is extremely important for them. posts by "newly saint" seemed rude coz he blantantly put forth this fact. ppl hate to hear that they are doing something morally wrong even if they know it in the back of their mind.