You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PERM Filing - Audit/Review Status
- Thread starter knowDOL
- Start date
My Status is also Audit Review since June 13 2005. My case was filed under EB2.
Business Necessity: Yes (Or Requirements Normal: No)
I haven't seen any posting where someone has received the audit review letter (from either Chicago or Atlanta). There seems to have been lot of Audit/Reviews for EB2 cases who have answered H12 (Requirements Normal) on ETA 9089 as No.
Contrary to my assumption that these Audits would require business necessity jusitfication, Murthy.com says that all but one Audit letter was for Business Necessity. Most of the audits so far are either employer's existance or Foreign Language.
Has anyone received the letter yet ? Please post your experience.
Business Necessity: Yes (Or Requirements Normal: No)
I haven't seen any posting where someone has received the audit review letter (from either Chicago or Atlanta). There seems to have been lot of Audit/Reviews for EB2 cases who have answered H12 (Requirements Normal) on ETA 9089 as No.
Contrary to my assumption that these Audits would require business necessity jusitfication, Murthy.com says that all but one Audit letter was for Business Necessity. Most of the audits so far are either employer's existance or Foreign Language.
Has anyone received the letter yet ? Please post your experience.
irinastaicu
Registered Users (C)
My case (EB2) went in 3 hours from sponsorship to audit review. Does anybody know if this is a normal stage or means already audit?
stuck in tx
Registered Users (C)
Got the same situation like yours. Mine is EB-2, Yes to Normal, No Businese Necessity. Let's hanging there!irinastaicu said:My case (EB2) went in 3 hours from sponsorship to audit review. Does anybody know if this is a normal stage or means already audit?
actually, i think murthy.com mentioned that almost all
audit reviews are for business necessity. In addition, they ask for company existence verification. Lets keep the hope up. DOL can't audit every EB2.
audit reviews are for business necessity. In addition, they ask for company existence verification. Lets keep the hope up. DOL can't audit every EB2.
GC_Reform said:My Status is also Audit Review since June 13 2005. My case was filed under EB2.
Business Necessity: Yes (Or Requirements Normal: No)
I haven't seen any posting where someone has received the audit review letter (from either Chicago or Atlanta). There seems to have been lot of Audit/Reviews for EB2 cases who have answered H12 (Requirements Normal) on ETA 9089 as No.
Contrary to my assumption that these Audits would require business necessity jusitfication, Murthy.com says that all but one Audit letter was for Business Necessity. Most of the audits so far are either employer's existance or Foreign Language.
Has anyone received the letter yet ? Please post your experience.
irinastaicu
Registered Users (C)
On Shella M news section she said that audit letters were sent already to the lawyers. Still nobody appears to get one. Sheela posted this message on june 10. If anybody got one, please share the information.
hi, iampppqqq
I am EB2 and I think my lawyer did the same thing as your lawyer. I am in audit/review since may 21st. So, what should we do except waiting?
Do you think this process is going to take months?
I am EB2 and I think my lawyer did the same thing as your lawyer. I am in audit/review since may 21st. So, what should we do except waiting?
Do you think this process is going to take months?
iampppqqq said:audit reviews are for business necessity. In addition, they ask for company existence verification. Lets keep the hope up. DOL can't audit every EB2.
This is the exact quote from Murthy.com:
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dolaud.html
"All but one of the reported DOL audit letters have been for positions that require fluency in a foreign language. Foreign language requirements historically have been carefully scrutinized in labor certification cases. All of the attorneys who have received the audit letters reported that they anticipated the likelihood of receiving an audit letter."
In my opinion it simply means that if none of us have Foreign Language requirements, then our Audits will be most likely for employer's existance.
Although only exception would be, significant changes in the statistics between now and when it was reported by Murthy.com.
In anycase business necessity jusitfications are harder to answer compared to proof of employer's existance.
This is all speculation until we see that damn letter and subsequent approvals/denials.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dolaud.html
"All but one of the reported DOL audit letters have been for positions that require fluency in a foreign language. Foreign language requirements historically have been carefully scrutinized in labor certification cases. All of the attorneys who have received the audit letters reported that they anticipated the likelihood of receiving an audit letter."
In my opinion it simply means that if none of us have Foreign Language requirements, then our Audits will be most likely for employer's existance.
Although only exception would be, significant changes in the statistics between now and when it was reported by Murthy.com.
In anycase business necessity jusitfications are harder to answer compared to proof of employer's existance.
This is all speculation until we see that damn letter and subsequent approvals/denials.
One person in murthy forum reported that his case was in Audit/Review for 20 or more days before approval, with masters + 0 yrs as requried. His H12 would have been Yes unlike us. But something to note.
I wish someone who received a letter from DOL for audit actually posts to this thread for all of our benefit.
I wish someone who received a letter from DOL for audit actually posts to this thread for all of our benefit.
Don't try to beat down everyone, but business necessity is what they are looking for.
Each of the audit letters reported requested the employer's reasons for requiring certain qualifications of the employee filling the offered position. When the employer shows that the education and/or experience necessary for a particular job exceed the DOL standards, the employer is required to justify the requirements by submitting evidence and satisfying the DOL that the particular prerequisites are a business necessity. The DOL's concern is that the employer's excessive posting for qualifications is solely to exclude U.S. workers. The DOL, therefore, wants to audit the case to ensure that the employer's need for the additional requirements indeed is justifiable as a business necessity.
Some of the DOL audit letters also asked for proof of the employer's existence.
Each of the audit letters reported requested the employer's reasons for requiring certain qualifications of the employee filling the offered position. When the employer shows that the education and/or experience necessary for a particular job exceed the DOL standards, the employer is required to justify the requirements by submitting evidence and satisfying the DOL that the particular prerequisites are a business necessity. The DOL's concern is that the employer's excessive posting for qualifications is solely to exclude U.S. workers. The DOL, therefore, wants to audit the case to ensure that the employer's need for the additional requirements indeed is justifiable as a business necessity.
Some of the DOL audit letters also asked for proof of the employer's existence.
GC_Reform said:This is the exact quote from Murthy.com:
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dolaud.html
"All but one of the reported DOL audit letters have been for positions that require fluency in a foreign language. Foreign language requirements historically have been carefully scrutinized in labor certification cases. All of the attorneys who have received the audit letters reported that they anticipated the likelihood of receiving an audit letter."
In my opinion it simply means that if none of us have Foreign Language requirements, then our Audits will be most likely for employer's existance.
Although only exception would be, significant changes in the statistics between now and when it was reported by Murthy.com.
In anycase business necessity jusitfications are harder to answer compared to proof of employer's existance.
This is all speculation until we see that damn letter and subsequent approvals/denials.
Business Necessity
I agree with you, BUT if you read further, it is clearly said that MOST Audit letters seeking business necessity jusitfication resulted from the cases where Language Fluency was a requirement.
Now if assuming none of us have language fluency requirements we can rule out purley by the virtue of statistics reported so far that the audit letters we will be receiving "MIGHT" not be for business necessity. That leaves us with most likely scenario of employer's existance.
Once again this is simply based on what has been reported from initial few AUDIT letters it might just be an aberration.
iampppqqq said:Each of the audit letters reported requested the employer's reasons for requiring certain qualifications of the employee filling the offered position. When the employer shows that the education and/or experience necessary for a particular job exceed the DOL standards, the employer is required to justify the requirements by submitting evidence and satisfying the DOL that the particular prerequisites are a business necessity. The DOL's concern is that the employer's excessive posting for qualifications is solely to exclude U.S. workers. The DOL, therefore, wants to audit the case to ensure that the employer's need for the additional requirements indeed is justifiable as a business necessity.
Some of the DOL audit letters also asked for proof of the employer's existence.
I agree with you, BUT if you read further, it is clearly said that MOST Audit letters seeking business necessity jusitfication resulted from the cases where Language Fluency was a requirement.
Now if assuming none of us have language fluency requirements we can rule out purley by the virtue of statistics reported so far that the audit letters we will be receiving "MIGHT" not be for business necessity. That leaves us with most likely scenario of employer's existance.
Once again this is simply based on what has been reported from initial few AUDIT letters it might just be an aberration.
lillywilly
New Member
So far we have seen only MS +0yrs application approval.I don't think this is fair.Who do you think a company would really prefer to hire a BS +5 yr experience person or a MS with no experience.Does this imply that if we don't have an MS from US we don't have a future here.
sourcefactor
Registered Users (C)
conversions in PERM
Has anyone filed a conversion from RIR to PERM yet? any one knows if any got approved.
Has anyone filed a conversion from RIR to PERM yet? any one knows if any got approved.
irinastaicu
Registered Users (C)
Audit review
AILA reported that audit letters were sent out at the end of may. Did anybody receive such a letter, asking for further documents?
AILA reported that audit letters were sent out at the end of may. Did anybody receive such a letter, asking for further documents?
Audit/EB2 Retrogression
Seems like PERM is a disappointment to all those (including myself) who were looking for a quick approval and moving to I-140/I-485 queue which is quite empty at this time.
Most of the EB2 cases from Asst Professor to Pediatrician to Radiologist to Software Engineer to Operation Research Analyst are under audit review.
Everyone is guessing what do they want to review in such vast majority of cases with vivid backgrounds.
It has been one month since the claim that audit letters have been dispatched. None reported (received ??) so far.
Big companies/ Small companies alike and all professions regardless of qualifications (Phd/MS/BS) are audited.
I wonder if Audit Review is a new way to create a black hole in the
system, so that DOL/USCIS can live up to their images of running the most inefficient immigration system in the entire world !!!
irinastaicu said:AILA reported that audit letters were sent out at the end of may. Did anybody receive such a letter, asking for further documents?
Seems like PERM is a disappointment to all those (including myself) who were looking for a quick approval and moving to I-140/I-485 queue which is quite empty at this time.
Most of the EB2 cases from Asst Professor to Pediatrician to Radiologist to Software Engineer to Operation Research Analyst are under audit review.
Everyone is guessing what do they want to review in such vast majority of cases with vivid backgrounds.
It has been one month since the claim that audit letters have been dispatched. None reported (received ??) so far.
Big companies/ Small companies alike and all professions regardless of qualifications (Phd/MS/BS) are audited.
I wonder if Audit Review is a new way to create a black hole in the
system, so that DOL/USCIS can live up to their images of running the most inefficient immigration system in the entire world !!!