my question for you guys

D

dimag_mari

Registered Users (C)
Hi Guys,

I just now got my GC,
can I open IT consultancy ?
if yes, can I sponsor H1B.

--------------------------------------------------------
it's headache everywhere, why not everything is easy ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, you can open a company. Legally you can sponsore H1 visas but most likely INS is not going to approve the petition because your company does not have any history. So try to develop some history first (at leat for 6 months to 1 yr) doing 3rd party placements and yourself working as consultant of your company.
 
I know people who've started consultancy companies while they are on H1s. So, definitely u can start companies after becoming PR.
 
why I need to work for my employer for a while ?,

I want to be employee as long as they keep me.

my company opening is nothing to do with my emplyement.

I was with them for 6 years and I want to be with them for a long time.
 
JoeF said:
Because It's the law... You got the GC by promising to work for the employer. If you break that promise, you may be in trouble.
Ok, that wasn't clear from your original post. You want to run your company on the side, in addition to your fulltime employment for your employer? That's fine. But, you need to check your employment contract. It may be that the contract doesn't allow you to moonlight somewhere else. A lot of companies have such a clause, to prevent people from working for competitors on the side. They also want your full mental attention to their job, and not see your performance diminish because you have your own side business on your mind. I had such a contract at one point.
Click to expand...


why law is like that, I want to be there fulltime permanent employee for a long time. why can't be I long time employee after GC.

why should I work for a while ? I want to work for a long time.

I am confused here. because my company applied for my GC so that I can be there fulltime emplyee. then why this law is not allowing me to be fulltime permanent employee. I don't want to work for a while. I want to be fulltime permanent employee.

I am really confused.

guys help me, show me path. I don't want to loose my JOB due to this GC
 
JoeF made up a law.

There is no such law or regulation saying that you have to work for your employer after GC. The so called 'intent' is just some of american wannabes' wild imagination which is not supported either by law or by any live case.
 
Either show us the law/case or forever stop BSing!!!!

A proper way to say is: well, there's no law or case that says you cannot leave your employer right after GC; however, our guess/suggestion is that it is better to stay with the same employer for about 6 months.
 
chinabee said:
A proper way to say is: well, there's no law or case that says you cannot leave your employer right after GC; however, our guess/suggestion is that it is better to stay with the same employer for a reasonable period of time.
Click to expand...

There, fixed that for you. :)

Despite people's claims that it doesn't apply in immigrant vs. non-immigrant cases, Seihoon v. Levy clearly establishes that "intent" is a valid concept in immigration. How long one stays at an employer is up in the air until USCIS decides to make an example of someone, and they choose to fight it.

Who wants to be the test case? ;)
 
chinabee said:
Either show us the law/case or forever stop BSing!!!!
Click to expand...

It's difficult to show someone law/case whose eyes and ears are definitely closed (probably brain too).

"Intent" is quintessential concept not only for immigration but for any other kind laws. USCIS gives you GC because you intend to live in USA. USCIS gives your EB GC because you intend to work with GC sponsorer.
 
I am not aruging against the concept of 'intent'. I am aruging against applying such intent AFTER GC.

Please do not mix up these 2 things.

In fact, you can just apply for citizenship 6 years later instead of 5, then you don't even have to mention your sponsoring employer.
 
chinabee said:
I am not aruging against the concept of 'intent'. I am aruging against applying such intent AFTER GC.
Click to expand...

GC is for future employment (after getting GC). If "intent" does not apply after getting GC, then when should it apply?
 
chinabee said:
I am not aruging against the concept of 'intent'. I am aruging against applying such intent AFTER GC.
Click to expand...

Interesting point, "intent" should exist be at the time of filing GC application not nessasarily after GC. Thats why cases like TRC and one more(which I know personally) got cleared without working with sponsor anytime at interview stage. Just snippets of thoughts.
 
qwertyisback said:
IThats why cases like TRC and one more(which I know personally) got cleared without working with sponsor anytime at interview stage.
Click to expand...

Person does not need to work for sponsoring company before USCIS granting GC (i.e. interview stage).
 
pralay said:
Person does not need to work for sponsoring company before USCIS granting GC (i.e. interview stage).
Click to expand...

Do you have part of law, where it mentions about intent and GC?? Can you post it here. The case I know, where person never worked for sponser, they applied GC for him and company got closed long before his GC interview and still he managed to get approval(interview) without any issues. Interestingly, INS officer asked him q/s regarding his GC sponsor and still raised no flags on anything. Also TRC can shade more light(if he choose) bout how he convince his "intent" to INS officer.

So we have atleast 2 known cases where apparently intent could be BIG issue, but still INS offcer ignored it or doesn't count it as issue though they were very much aware of case details (because its interview approval). It supports chinabee's argument .
 
qwertyisback said:
Do you have part of law, where it mentions about intent and GC?? Can you post it here. The case I know, where person never worked for sponser, they applied GC for him and company got closed long before his GC interview and still he managed to get approval(interview) without any issues. Interestingly, INS officer asked him q/s regarding his GC sponsor and still raised no flags on anything. Also TRC can shade more light(if he choose) bout how he convince his "intent" to INS officer.

So we have atleast 2 known cases where apparently intent could be BIG issue, but still INS offcer ignored it or doesn't count it as issue though they were very much aware of case details (because its interview approval). It supports chinabee's argument.
Click to expand...

In fact one of my friends had similar situation - his company went out of business before his RFE (no interview). In all the cases AC-21 applies. I don't see why adjucator would put red flag if I-485 is pending for more than 180 days and the beneficiary has an "alternate sponsorer". AC-21 allows to change intent for working with company X to company Y. But that does not mean "intent" does not apply after GC. Intent still applies and it applies after GC. Only difference is that the originial sponsorer is replaced by another company.
Secondly, AC-21 is introduced bacause in past I-485 used to take more than 2 years due to backlog. It's unfair to think that a person has to keep his intent for that long duration. That's why USCIS put some specific timelimit - in this case 180 days. However, this relief does not nullify the rule of intent.

So if I apply for I-485 today with company X, and then very next day I assume that I don't need to have my intent anymore (with chinabee's argument) - that's wrong.
 
Please don't put words in my mouth.

I do agree that during the I485 process, you need to have your intent to work for the sponsoring employer; however, once GC is granted, no such intent is necessary.

Is there a law or case stating this is incorrect? Nada.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top