Interview notification received: AC-21: Changed jobs before 180 days

DukhiInsaan

New Member
Hi,

I have been a dormant reader of these forums for the past 3 years, however, this is my first post: please forgive me if I violate any forum rules.

Here is my case history (Vermont Service Center):

LC was filed in Nov 2000, approved in June 2001.

I-140 was filed in July 2001, check bounced, my employer dropped the ball on this, and was rejected in Dec 2001. I-140 was refiled in Dec 2001, RFE in March 2002 with request for financial info for my employer, which was provided, and was finally approved in July 2002.

I-485 was RDs 28 August end 2002. The division I worked for was sold off in Oct 2002, and all employees were acquired (offered employment) by the new company. I joined based on my EAD, after consulting with lawyers both in the company as well as outside consultation.

In May 2004, case was sent to local office. Both my spouse and I received interview notices in the mail asking us to appear in person. When I talked to our company paralegal, I was advised to have legal representation in the interview due to the fact that I changed jobs before 180 days.

The interview notice we got are pretty simple letters, that asks us to repeat our medical exams, and bring in originals for all documents submitted when I-485 was filed. There does not seem to be any RFEs. They have not asked for any employment verification letters or otherwise.

My questions:

a. Is there any risk in having legal representation during the interview? I mean, if the local office is treating this as a simple case, will my bringing in a lawyer raise a red flag in the mind of the officer?

b. Although I was advised otherwise, do you think that the job change can cause problems? A job hange letter was duly filed.

c. Any other advice you would care to provide.

Thanks
 
when you say "job hange letter", is it Ac 21 letter? What I don't understand is since it's an acquisition, the new company basically just need to send a letter to CIS telling them that the new company is now taking over the case. Most companies do this without having to trigger any AC21 issue.

as to your question:
a) you do not need to use the lawyer right in the beginning. first start with only you and your wife, use the lawyer when you two got into any trouble.
b) remember to bring offer letter from the new compmay, paystubs, W2s and all supportive documents with you.
c) reherse different cenarios with your lawyer beforehand. and prepare for the legal argument. I'd also bring AC21 INS memo from Aug 2003.
 
whorl1quote said:
when you say "job hange letter", is it Ac 21 letter? What I don't understand is since it's an acquisition, the new company basically just need to send a letter to CIS telling them that the new company is now taking over the case. Most companies do this without having to trigger any AC21 issue.

as to your question:
a) you do not need to use the lawyer right in the beginning. first start with only you and your wife, use the lawyer when you two got into any trouble.
b) remember to bring offer letter from the new compmay, paystubs, W2s and all supportive documents with you.
c) reherse different cenarios with your lawyer beforehand. and prepare for the legal argument. I'd also bring AC21 INS memo from Aug 2003.


Thanks for your response. By the job change letter, I do mean AC21 letter. The acquisition went through in an interesting way: the new company acquired part of the business/clientele of the old company, but not the whole company. That way the new company was not liable for the debts of the old company. The new company offered us jobs as part of this deal, but that meant quiiting the old job and joining the new one.

Are you saying that I should definitely have a lawyer with me? I am not clear about *not using the lawyer in the beginning*. Do I have the option of not going in with the lawyer, and only ask for him/her in case things go wrong?

Thanks
 
dukhiInsaan,

you and your wife go to the interview without telling the officier that the lawyer is with you. Your lawyer then only appear when the officier had troubles with your case. the lawyer is in a better position to talk the law with the officier.

I do not think you must have a lawyer, because your case is essentially acusition. just prepare a letter from your current employer explaining the situation. I do not think you will have issues. However, it's good to have a lawyer in case.
 
whorl1quote said:
dukhiInsaan,

you and your wife go to the interview without telling the officier that the lawyer is with you. Your lawyer then only appear when the officier had troubles with your case. the lawyer is in a better position to talk the law with the officier.

I do not think you must have a lawyer, because your case is essentially acusition. just prepare a letter from your current employer explaining the situation. I do not think you will have issues. However, it's good to have a lawyer in case.
When you go for the interview first they will ask to sign a letter you do not have an attorney to represent if you do not have one. It is called attorney waiver. You cannot hide the attorney. There is no need of worrying. If he asks you can tell the truth the division of the company you are working was overtaken.
Take some AC-21 documentation along with you. Inform the officer that your attorney has told that under AC-21 the case approvable. It should not matter at all.

Usually in such cases the some attorney prefer the file the amending the underlying I-140. Since your job was new one attorney might have preferred to use AC-21 rather then filing an amendment.

AC-21 requires you I-485 pending for six months. It does not require you work for six months. There should not be any problems.

Where is your interview? You can also ask the people who have done the interview at that location.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top