I-485 will be denied if you continue with same employer....

Great story. It is important to note how they are checkinng LCA and G-325 forms to come to conclusion of I-485. Each address matters.
 
clear485 said:
This has to be read everyone whose I-485 is in pending.....

Is it not safe, if we continue with same employer that who sponsored GC...
This is really sacres me....the reason they denied 485 for a guy (even in AAO)....

http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/...204_01a1245.pdf

Please read and let us discuss the things.....
Click to expand...


This is indeed scary.
A couple of things that needs addressing are...
[1] AFAIK when the attorney files I129 they leave the employment location blank (which means that the employee will be working at the primary location from where the application is filed, which is, the address filed in Part 1). So there are many consulting companies which might not have offices throughout the US and would require their employees to stay at various places depending on the clients location. So would all those applications be denied?

[2] What is the final ruling of the AAO? It says that the Directors decision has to be withdrawn and entry of a new decision. So technically the case is not rejected (yet)? Am I right?

Guys shed some light to this discussion!

-dyno
 

On Second thought, I think the counsel in that case made a wrong appeal. GC is for future employment. So instead of the counsel bringing in the various AC21 rules (which we all know is one of the most confusing USCIS law to date), they could have just submitted a intend of future employment at the location for which the labor is approved. This would have resolved the matter without divulging into various rules regarding I129s and I325s.

What do u guys think?

-dyno

 
dynobuoy said:

This is indeed scary.
A couple of things that needs addressing are...
[1] AFAIK when the attorney files I129 they leave the employment location blank (which means that the employee will be working at the primary location from where the application is filed, which is, the address filed in Part 1). So there are many consulting companies which might not have offices throughout the US and would require their employees to stay at various places depending on the clients location. So would all those applications be denied?

[2] What is the final ruling of the AAO? It says that the Directors decision has to be withdrawn and entry of a new decision. So technically the case is not rejected (yet)? Am I right?

Guys shed some light to this discussion!

-dyno
Click to expand...
Usualy good attorneys add clause Unspecified locations while filing labor. Refer to this thread

http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=146962
 
tammy2 said:
Usualy good attorneys add clause Unspecified locations while filing labor. Refer to this thread

http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=146962
Click to expand...
Thanks tammy2

But the issue is that even if yoiu had specified 'unspecified locations' the H1 needs to be amended for each location when the location changes. The AAO suggests that a itinerary be attached while filing 325a.

These are 2 things then.

Firstly, many lawyers (I have seen I-129 filed by even Khanna and Murthy) had left the part 5 of I129 blank. Were those H1Bs amernded each time the beneficiary changed locations? My employer had processed close to 500 GC applications in since 1998 (I do not have records beyond that) and none had this issue. So since when did an H1B amendment become a part os I-485 ajudication?

Second is that of form 325A. Experts would agree that this form had never seen a revision for quiet a long time (for abt 20-25 yrs). There are no proper instructions given to fill this form. So how could USCIS use this form to make a decision?

-dyno


 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top