One letter to Mr. Yates and here comes the new AC21 memo!

A

aws

Registered Users (C)
Folks,

I don't know where to start, but I thought it is the right time to re-surface on the board after being quiet for 9+ months.
Until late last year, I was an active member of this forum, but circumstances forced me to dis-appear.

Below are my brief details:

1) Filed I140/I485 eb-2 in Oct. 2003, PD June 2002 with comp. A
2) In Aug. 2004, when both 140/485 were pending with NSC for 10+ months, showed the guts to move to a new employer B to take "dream job" using AC21 portability with identical job description as in LCA. At that time, President of A agreed to support me and not to withdraw my I140. :)
3) comp A showed true colors and back stabbed me -- withdrew my I140 in Feb 2005 and as a result, NSC denied my 485 :mad:
4) Filed MTR on 485 explaining NSC that as per original law, I am fully eligible for AC21 as the law itself does not require I140 approval
5) MTR still pending at NSC for 60+ days.

Action: --In mid April '05, I wrote a letter to Mr. Yates explaining my situation and urging him to eliminate all the "grey areas" in AC21 interpretation. I claimed to be fully eligible for AC21 and asked him to issue more crsytal clear guidance on his previous memo of Aug. 2003. I knew I have nothing to loose at that time, but didn't want to spare any efforts in fighting for my case.

Reaction: Within 3 weeks of receipt of my letter, here comes the new AC21 memo from him which I hope is now a life saver for me. Though I don't claim that he issued the memo on my request, but looking at some of the wording in his memo (similar to what I used in my letter to him) I trust that my letter does have some impact on his memo

In the mean time, comp A kept asking me to re-join them and then, they will re-file 140/485 for me using my own LCA....

Next step: I am going to write to NSC to approve my 485 based on the light of this new memo which clears most things as "black and white" with little left to any one's discretion or interpretation.

Finally, I wish if my contemporaries like (naanshi, iknowitall, gcbandwagon, bigbadwolf, elnegro, etc) were still around, they would exactly know what I went through so far....

Nevertheless, I hope this memo will help many of us who were being exploited by their employers.

-aws
 
aws,

Good job aws. I know the pains you have been going thru as I am also victim of those pains.

I am not sure if the memo would apply to previous cases as well and if there is a cutoff date.

I think we will figure out more in the coming days and act accordingly.

Best of luck to all.

Sandeep
 
Last edited by a moderator:
aws said:
Folks,

I don't know where to start, but I thought it is the right time to re-surface on the board after being quiet for 9+ months.
Until late last year, I was an active member of this forum, but circumstances forced me to dis-appear.

Below are my brief details:

1) Filed I140/I485 eb-2 in Oct. 2003, PD June 2002 with comp. A
2) In Aug. 2004, when both 140/485 were pending with NSC for 10+ months, showed the guts to move to a new employer B to take "dream job" using AC21 portability with identical job description as in LCA. At that time, President of A agreed to support me and not to withdraw my I140. :)
3) comp A showed true colors and back stabbed me -- withdrew my I140 in Feb 2005 and as a result, NSC denied my 485 :mad:
4) Filed MTR on 485 explaining NSC that as per original law, I am fully eligible for AC21 as the law itself does not require I140 approval
5) MTR still pending at NSC for 60+ days.

Action: --In mid April '05, I wrote a letter to Mr. Yates explaining my situation and urging him to eliminate all the "grey areas" in AC21 interpretation. I claimed to be fully eligible for AC21 and asked him to issue more crsytal clear guidance on his previous memo of Aug. 2003. I knew I have nothing to loose at that time, but didn't want to spare any efforts in fighting for my case.

Reaction: Within 3 weeks of receipt of my letter, here comes the new AC21 memo from him which I hope is now a life saver for me. Though I don't claim that he issued the memo on my request, but looking at some of the wording in his memo (similar to what I used in my letter to him) I trust that my letter does have some impact on his memo

In the mean time, comp A kept asking me to re-join them and then, they will re-file 140/485 for me using my own LCA....
----------------- LCA is filed with H1B petition, LC is filed with I-140 and LC is filed by employer for future permanent job

Next step: I am going to write to NSC to approve my 485 based on the light of this new memo which clears most things as "black and white" with little left to any one's discretion or interpretation.

Finally, I wish if my contemporaries like (naanshi, iknowitall, gcbandwagon, bigbadwolf, elnegro, etc) were still around, they would exactly know what I went through so far....

Nevertheless, I hope this memo will help many of us who were being exploited by their employers.

------------------- Good Luck!!
-aws
Click to expand...
 
Can you write another letter please

aws,

Good job.
There are still few issues with portability of I-140 before approval. Why the petetioner still need to respod to RFE? That is going to defeat the use of portability before approval. I know few employers deliberately miss documents and wait for RFEs to delay the process. This may bebcome usual now to stop beneficiaries using ac21 since all RFEs have to be answered by petetioner.


regards
 
What if you are accepting another job with the same employer e.g. JP Morgan in another location and 140 is pending for over 180 days? It is guarnateed that 140 will not be touched. You think I should be safe in making this move?
 
gc4now said:
aws,

Good job.
There are still few issues with portability of I-140 before approval. Why the petetioner still need to respod to RFE? That is going to defeat the use of portability before approval. I know few employers deliberately miss documents and wait for RFEs to delay the process. This may bebcome usual now to stop beneficiaries using ac21 since all RFEs have to be answered by petetioner.


regards
Click to expand...

This memo is just "Old wine in new bottle"
 
HuiFang said:
What if you are accepting another job with the same employer e.g. JP Morgan in another location and 140 is pending for over 180 days? It is guarnateed that 140 will not be touched. You think I should be safe in making this move?
Click to expand...

You can make the move based on AC21, provided the other job is the same or similar one, just a different location. This has been reinfocred in the updated memo too.

It holds true for jobs with the same employer too, like just a geographical transfer, but same job.
 
well said!

naanshi said:
This memo is just "Old wine in new bottle"
Click to expand...

buddy naanshi,

i liked your way of describing it! but don't forget that older the wine, more is the kick... :D (though i myself has never drank any beer, alcohol, wine, etc., in my life time)

atleast from my point of view, it should work for me. for folks who got a rfe on 140 after they left, this new memo really does a little to absolve them -- which is really illogical.
 
Hi Tammy,
I am doing fine. Just life is going on...

GC_Gone_case,
This memo might help you a lot with your old case. I think you should file MTR immediately like aws. And also I called your office number two days back, after seeing your mail. Looks like you were not there. Talk to you soon.

aws,
I don't find any thing different in this memo. Still you need your I-140 approval. Still your petitioner must answer the query (mainly Company Financial), which is highly impossible. So those who got RFE or will get after changing employer will
suffer a lot.

Thanks a lot Friends!!!

naanshi
 
aws said:
Folks,

I don't know where to start, but I thought it is the right time to re-surface on the board after being quiet for 9+ months.
Until late last year, I was an active member of this forum, but circumstances forced me to dis-appear.

Below are my brief details:

1) Filed I140/I485 eb-2 in Oct. 2003, PD June 2002 with comp. A
2) In Aug. 2004, when both 140/485 were pending with NSC for 10+ months, showed the guts to move to a new employer B to take "dream job" using AC21 portability with identical job description as in LCA. At that time, President of A agreed to support me and not to withdraw my I140. :)
3) comp A showed true colors and back stabbed me -- withdrew my I140 in Feb 2005 and as a result, NSC denied my 485 :mad:
4) Filed MTR on 485 explaining NSC that as per original law, I am fully eligible for AC21 as the law itself does not require I140 approval
5) MTR still pending at NSC for 60+ days.

Action: --In mid April '05, I wrote a letter to Mr. Yates explaining my situation and urging him to eliminate all the "grey areas" in AC21 interpretation. I claimed to be fully eligible for AC21 and asked him to issue more crsytal clear guidance on his previous memo of Aug. 2003. I knew I have nothing to loose at that time, but didn't want to spare any efforts in fighting for my case.

Reaction: Within 3 weeks of receipt of my letter, here comes the new AC21 memo from him which I hope is now a life saver for me. Though I don't claim that he issued the memo on my request, but looking at some of the wording in his memo (similar to what I used in my letter to him) I trust that my letter does have some impact on his memo

In the mean time, comp A kept asking me to re-join them and then, they will re-file 140/485 for me using my own LCA....

Next step: I am going to write to NSC to approve my 485 based on the light of this new memo which clears most things as "black and white" with little left to any one's discretion or interpretation.

Finally, I wish if my contemporaries like (naanshi, iknowitall, gcbandwagon, bigbadwolf, elnegro, etc) were still around, they would exactly know what I went through so far....

Nevertheless, I hope this memo will help many of us who were being exploited by their employers.

-aws
Click to expand...
compared to previous ones this memo addresses some more topics but its still not clear for me if somebody should send AC-21 proactively. why cant USCIS be clear on this?
 
Does it mean employer lose control after 180 days of pending 140

Hi All,

Does it mean employer lose control after 180 days of pending 140. Also That means in any circumstances employer can not use the underlying LC for another beneficiary. If it gets denied(by not answering RFE or informing that employee is no more with the company) after 180 days the LC can not be used again. Previously employers used to withdraw or revoke 140 to use LC to another person.

Regards
 
questions:
Can employer file a labor substitution by using the labor for which I140 is already approved?
Can he revoke the approved 140 and use the underlaying labor for another I140?
I was thinking.. once I 140 is approved the underlaying labor is use less Am I wrong?

Employer need to attach original labor to I 140 right? so one can not file multiple I 140s based on one approved labor?


If I 140 is approved and you file for I485 ., can the benificiary change employer before 180 days based on new AC21 updates?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top