Hello Everybody, need your input. Jim M, your input needed too.

S

stirumal77

Registered Users (C)
My company was bought over by another company in December of 2001, which was beyond 6 months after my 485 filing. My company told that since it was
beyond 6 months, they do not need to amend the 140. In February of 2002, my 485 has been approved. When I go to the passport stamping, do you think
I should take an employment letter from the new company. Also, do I need to mention at all about the company change?

What do you think. Any similar experiences? I really appreciate your input.

Thanks again.
 
RE:Hello Everybody, need your input. Jim M, your input needed too

You should definetly talk to your immigration attorney about this.

  My case was slightly different from yours: My company was bought by another one before I filed my 485. But my lawyer suggested that I should file an amendment I140 along with I485, which we did. My case went through without any problem.

To your other question:I stamped my passport today(02/20/02). I did it in Boston INS. No questions were asked. The INS officer checked my courtesy I485 approved copy, collected my EAD and AP and stamped in my passport without asking any question. I didn\'t take any employee related documents. I just had the documents whatever the approval form asked me to bring.

Hope this helps. Also, please post your attorney\'s response in this discussion, if possible. Thanks.

Raj
 
Thanks for replying. My immigration attorney thinks that

I do not need to take any employment letter. Since it was done after
my 180 days were up, I would have been able to change my employer any way. He said that, "Passport stamping after the approval is very administrative task. You will not be talking to any INS officer during the process". Hence I do not have to bring up the issue of my company being bought over by another.

Thanks
 
I agree with your lawyer on this.

I don\'t see how an amended I-140 could be required if you can change companies. It probably would be a good idea to be able to prove that you are still employed in a "similar" position but I don\'t see any logical reason why an amended I-140 would be required.

Jim

James D. Mills
Attorney at Law
jdmills@justice.com
732-644-5702
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top