Blog Feeds
05-17 12:40 PM
Last week we became members of Global Alliance of Hospitality Attorneys (http://www.hospitalitylawyer.com/index.php?id=47), this will allow us to serve our clients even better and offer solution to the ever changing global workforce that the hospitality industry is facing.
Whether transferring employees between international properties or employing management trainees, immigration is an integral part of the hospitality industry. The top seven visa types utilized by the hospitality industry are the J-1, H-3,H2B, L-1,E2, TN and H-1B. The following is a brief outline of each of these visa types:
E2 Visa (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137174.html)
This is also known as the nonimmigrant investor visa. It is a temporary category that is granted in two-year to five year increments with no limits on the number of extensions. In comparison, the H-2B is limited to 10 months with 3 extensions. The E-2 category is available to citizens of countries that have a treaty of trade or commerce with the U.S. such as the Holland, France and the UK The State Department does not require any specific size investment. Rather it says the business owner must invest a "substantial amount of capital" that generates "more than enough income to provide a minimal living for the treaty investor and his or her family.".
An E-2 allows European nationals to manage investments that are at least 50% Euro owned. The visa requires that the U.S. investment be substantial and generates a substantial income. While there are no hard and fast figures on what the minimum investment amount is, the USCIS generally require a business investment of $150,000 or more, but the investment amount depends on the nature of the business. For example, opening up a restaurant in downtown San Diego would require 500,000 dollars while opening up a Catering business firm may only require start up costs of $70,000. This is why there is no fixed figure on a minimum investment amount.
The E-2 investor must show that its return on investment is more than what is necessary to merely support the investor in the U.S. Another example illustrates how this works. An E-2 investor wishes to establish a French Bakery and will invest $35,000 to buy the equipment. He expects the Bakery to generate $60,000 in gross sales. This business would probably not qualify because the gross income generated would not be substantial. The Bakery would only generate enough money to support the investor.
H2B Visa (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137785.html)
Temporary nonimmigrant classifications that allow noncitizens to come to the United States to perform temporary or seasonal work that is nonagricultural (such as hospitality or resort work) if persons capable of performing such a service or labor cannot be found in this country. Up to 66,000 new visas are available each year in this category. The number has been reached increasingly earlier every year. In Fiscal Year 2007, the first half of the cap was reached 3 days before the year began and the second half was met 4 months before the period began. From March of 2005 through September of 2007, returning workers were exempt from counting toward that cap due to the lack of temporary workers. Congress is considering renewing this popular policy.
Employer's need must be temporary: Visas are only authorized if the employer can demonstrate a "temporary" need, that is, less than one year, and that the need is either a "one-time occurrence," a "seasonal need," a "peakload need" or an "intermittent need." The employer cannot use this category for permanent and long-term labor needs.
Employee's intent must be temporary: The nonimmigrant worker must intend to return to his or her country upon expiration of his or her authorized stay. The worker may be required to prove ties to his or her home country.
J1 Visa
For seasonal/temporary employment, there is the J-1 Summer Work/Travel Program, which allows foreign college or university students to work in the U.S. during their summer vacation.
This type of J-1 classification is valid for four months and allows the students to assist
companies in meeting current labor demands. In addition, the biggest benefit to this type of J-1 classification is that the foreign students can do any type of work for the company. It is not necessary for the work to be related to the student�s degree.
The Management Trainee J-1 visa classification is another viable option and is valid for twelve to eighteen months and considered relatively easy to obtain. The potential trainees must possess a post-secondary degree or professional certificate and one year of work experience in their occupational field from outside the U.S. Five years of work experience in their occupational field can also be used in place of the post-secondary degree or professional certificate.
H3 Visa
The H3 has become a popular option for many of our Hotel clients and we use it for certain trainees that need advanced training that is NOT available in their home countries.
An application for an H-3 visa requires the prior filing with a BCIS service center of a petition by the foreign national�s prospective trainer on Form I-129 with an H Supplement, a training program including the names of the prospective trainees, and the proper filing fee. The petition may be filed for multiple trainees so long as they will be receiving the same training for the same period of time at the same location. Additionally, the petition must indicate the source of any remuneration received by the trainee and any benefits that will accrue to the petitioning organization for providing the training. The trainee must demonstrate nonimmigrant intent by having an unabandoned residence in a foreign country. There are no numerical limits on the number of H-3 petitions issued each year. H-3 visas are not based on college education.
Upon approval of the petition, an I-797 Notice of Action of approval is issued by the service center. The foreign national submits the I-797 approval notice to an American consulate abroad with Form DS-156 and, if necessary, the DS-157 and other forms required by the consulate to obtain an H-3 visa stamp. A foreign national in the United States may apply for change of status to H-3.
TN Visa
NAFTA is the North American Free Trade Agreement. It creates special economic and trade relationships for the United States, Canada and Mexico. The nonimmigrant NAFTA Professional (TN) visa allows citizens of Canada and Mexico, as NAFTA professionals to work in the United States. Permanent residents, including Canadian permanent residents, are not able to apply to work as a NAFTA professional.
The Conditions for Professionals from Mexico and Canada to Work in the United States
* Applicant should be a citizen of Canada or Mexico;
* Profession must be on the NAFTA list; - Hotel Manager is a NAFTA category
* Position in the U.S. requires a NAFTA professional;
* Mexican or Canadian applicant is to work in a prearranged full-time or part-time job, for a U.S. employer (see documentation required). Self employment is not permitted;
* Professional Canadian or Mexican citizen has the qualifications of the profession
Requirements for Canadian Citizens
Canadian citizens usually do not need a visa as a NAFTA Professional, although a visa can be issued to qualified TN visa applicants upon request. However, a Canadian residing in another country with a non-Canadian spouse and children would need a visa to enable the spouse and children to be able to apply for a visa to accompany or join the NAFTA Professional, as a TD visa holder.
L1 Visa
L-1 category is meant for aliens coming to the United States on temporary assignment for the same or an affiliated employer for which the alien worked abroad for at least one year within the proceeding three years. Many large hotel chanins have takes advantage of this visa to bring top executives to the US locations or workers with specialized skills. The alien must be employed in a managerial or executive capacity (L-1A) or one involving specialized knowledge (L-1B). There is no annual limit on the number issued.
The family members of L-1 alien can come to the U.S. under L-2 category. However, they cannot engage in employment in the United States unless they change the status to a nonimmigrant category for which employment is allowed.
Requirements
A U.S. employer or foreign employer (must have a legal business in the U.S.) seeking to transfer a qualifying employee of the same organization must file petition with USCIS.
H1B visa
Aliens coming to the United States to perform services in a specialty occupation or as a fashion model of distinguished merit and ability are classified under H-1B category.
A maximum of 65,000 H-1B visas are issued every year. The H-1B visa is issued for up to three years but may be extended for another three years. Individuals cannot apply for an H-1B visa to allow them to work in the US. The employer must petition for entry of the employee.
Specialty occupation is defined as an occupation, which requires:
* Theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and
* Attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum for entry
A specialty occupation requires theoretical and practical application of a body of specialized knowledge along with at least a bachelor's degree or its equivalent. For example, architecture, engineering, mathematics, physical sciences, social sciences, medicine and health, education, business specialties, accounting, law, theology, and the arts are specialty occupations.
We have processed H1B visas for Front Desk managers, food service managers, Chefs, Public Relations specialists, and Lodging Managers as well as other specialized positions.
The above referenced visas will allow Hotels, Resorts and Restaurants to hire any type of workers needed to support their operations in the US. Hotels often face shortage in skilled labor, a careful usage of the above 7 visas will ensure constant flow of workers. Through our membership in the Global Alliance of Hospitality Attorneys, we will continue to offer our clients superior service.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/05/hospitality_immigration_lawyer_2.html)
Whether transferring employees between international properties or employing management trainees, immigration is an integral part of the hospitality industry. The top seven visa types utilized by the hospitality industry are the J-1, H-3,H2B, L-1,E2, TN and H-1B. The following is a brief outline of each of these visa types:
E2 Visa (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137174.html)
This is also known as the nonimmigrant investor visa. It is a temporary category that is granted in two-year to five year increments with no limits on the number of extensions. In comparison, the H-2B is limited to 10 months with 3 extensions. The E-2 category is available to citizens of countries that have a treaty of trade or commerce with the U.S. such as the Holland, France and the UK The State Department does not require any specific size investment. Rather it says the business owner must invest a "substantial amount of capital" that generates "more than enough income to provide a minimal living for the treaty investor and his or her family.".
An E-2 allows European nationals to manage investments that are at least 50% Euro owned. The visa requires that the U.S. investment be substantial and generates a substantial income. While there are no hard and fast figures on what the minimum investment amount is, the USCIS generally require a business investment of $150,000 or more, but the investment amount depends on the nature of the business. For example, opening up a restaurant in downtown San Diego would require 500,000 dollars while opening up a Catering business firm may only require start up costs of $70,000. This is why there is no fixed figure on a minimum investment amount.
The E-2 investor must show that its return on investment is more than what is necessary to merely support the investor in the U.S. Another example illustrates how this works. An E-2 investor wishes to establish a French Bakery and will invest $35,000 to buy the equipment. He expects the Bakery to generate $60,000 in gross sales. This business would probably not qualify because the gross income generated would not be substantial. The Bakery would only generate enough money to support the investor.
H2B Visa (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137785.html)
Temporary nonimmigrant classifications that allow noncitizens to come to the United States to perform temporary or seasonal work that is nonagricultural (such as hospitality or resort work) if persons capable of performing such a service or labor cannot be found in this country. Up to 66,000 new visas are available each year in this category. The number has been reached increasingly earlier every year. In Fiscal Year 2007, the first half of the cap was reached 3 days before the year began and the second half was met 4 months before the period began. From March of 2005 through September of 2007, returning workers were exempt from counting toward that cap due to the lack of temporary workers. Congress is considering renewing this popular policy.
Employer's need must be temporary: Visas are only authorized if the employer can demonstrate a "temporary" need, that is, less than one year, and that the need is either a "one-time occurrence," a "seasonal need," a "peakload need" or an "intermittent need." The employer cannot use this category for permanent and long-term labor needs.
Employee's intent must be temporary: The nonimmigrant worker must intend to return to his or her country upon expiration of his or her authorized stay. The worker may be required to prove ties to his or her home country.
J1 Visa
For seasonal/temporary employment, there is the J-1 Summer Work/Travel Program, which allows foreign college or university students to work in the U.S. during their summer vacation.
This type of J-1 classification is valid for four months and allows the students to assist
companies in meeting current labor demands. In addition, the biggest benefit to this type of J-1 classification is that the foreign students can do any type of work for the company. It is not necessary for the work to be related to the student�s degree.
The Management Trainee J-1 visa classification is another viable option and is valid for twelve to eighteen months and considered relatively easy to obtain. The potential trainees must possess a post-secondary degree or professional certificate and one year of work experience in their occupational field from outside the U.S. Five years of work experience in their occupational field can also be used in place of the post-secondary degree or professional certificate.
H3 Visa
The H3 has become a popular option for many of our Hotel clients and we use it for certain trainees that need advanced training that is NOT available in their home countries.
An application for an H-3 visa requires the prior filing with a BCIS service center of a petition by the foreign national�s prospective trainer on Form I-129 with an H Supplement, a training program including the names of the prospective trainees, and the proper filing fee. The petition may be filed for multiple trainees so long as they will be receiving the same training for the same period of time at the same location. Additionally, the petition must indicate the source of any remuneration received by the trainee and any benefits that will accrue to the petitioning organization for providing the training. The trainee must demonstrate nonimmigrant intent by having an unabandoned residence in a foreign country. There are no numerical limits on the number of H-3 petitions issued each year. H-3 visas are not based on college education.
Upon approval of the petition, an I-797 Notice of Action of approval is issued by the service center. The foreign national submits the I-797 approval notice to an American consulate abroad with Form DS-156 and, if necessary, the DS-157 and other forms required by the consulate to obtain an H-3 visa stamp. A foreign national in the United States may apply for change of status to H-3.
TN Visa
NAFTA is the North American Free Trade Agreement. It creates special economic and trade relationships for the United States, Canada and Mexico. The nonimmigrant NAFTA Professional (TN) visa allows citizens of Canada and Mexico, as NAFTA professionals to work in the United States. Permanent residents, including Canadian permanent residents, are not able to apply to work as a NAFTA professional.
The Conditions for Professionals from Mexico and Canada to Work in the United States
* Applicant should be a citizen of Canada or Mexico;
* Profession must be on the NAFTA list; - Hotel Manager is a NAFTA category
* Position in the U.S. requires a NAFTA professional;
* Mexican or Canadian applicant is to work in a prearranged full-time or part-time job, for a U.S. employer (see documentation required). Self employment is not permitted;
* Professional Canadian or Mexican citizen has the qualifications of the profession
Requirements for Canadian Citizens
Canadian citizens usually do not need a visa as a NAFTA Professional, although a visa can be issued to qualified TN visa applicants upon request. However, a Canadian residing in another country with a non-Canadian spouse and children would need a visa to enable the spouse and children to be able to apply for a visa to accompany or join the NAFTA Professional, as a TD visa holder.
L1 Visa
L-1 category is meant for aliens coming to the United States on temporary assignment for the same or an affiliated employer for which the alien worked abroad for at least one year within the proceeding three years. Many large hotel chanins have takes advantage of this visa to bring top executives to the US locations or workers with specialized skills. The alien must be employed in a managerial or executive capacity (L-1A) or one involving specialized knowledge (L-1B). There is no annual limit on the number issued.
The family members of L-1 alien can come to the U.S. under L-2 category. However, they cannot engage in employment in the United States unless they change the status to a nonimmigrant category for which employment is allowed.
Requirements
A U.S. employer or foreign employer (must have a legal business in the U.S.) seeking to transfer a qualifying employee of the same organization must file petition with USCIS.
H1B visa
Aliens coming to the United States to perform services in a specialty occupation or as a fashion model of distinguished merit and ability are classified under H-1B category.
A maximum of 65,000 H-1B visas are issued every year. The H-1B visa is issued for up to three years but may be extended for another three years. Individuals cannot apply for an H-1B visa to allow them to work in the US. The employer must petition for entry of the employee.
Specialty occupation is defined as an occupation, which requires:
* Theoretical and practical application of a body of highly specialized knowledge, and
* Attainment of a bachelor's or higher degree in the specific specialty (or its equivalent) as a minimum for entry
A specialty occupation requires theoretical and practical application of a body of specialized knowledge along with at least a bachelor's degree or its equivalent. For example, architecture, engineering, mathematics, physical sciences, social sciences, medicine and health, education, business specialties, accounting, law, theology, and the arts are specialty occupations.
We have processed H1B visas for Front Desk managers, food service managers, Chefs, Public Relations specialists, and Lodging Managers as well as other specialized positions.
The above referenced visas will allow Hotels, Resorts and Restaurants to hire any type of workers needed to support their operations in the US. Hotels often face shortage in skilled labor, a careful usage of the above 7 visas will ensure constant flow of workers. Through our membership in the Global Alliance of Hospitality Attorneys, we will continue to offer our clients superior service.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/05/hospitality_immigration_lawyer_2.html)
wallpaper Aussie celebrity chef Curtis
Scythe
10-29 07:57 PM
Well you put tables in houses... so why not put them in websites?
(Going with the given assumption that websites inherit from houses somehow.)
(Going with the given assumption that websites inherit from houses somehow.)
meridiani.planum
06-17 09:24 PM
inline...
Hi,
This is the 6th year of my H1B visa going on and my max out calender date is in June-2011 (including the days spent outside USA). My Green Card application was supposed to file last year but because of economy and job market situation, my Employer did not apply at that time. Now my Employer is going to start GC processing in July/August-2010. But as per the DOL rules, my GC must have been applied before 365 days of max out calender date, to qualify for H1Bb Visa extension beyond 6 years. I have the questions below in this regard:
1. What happens if Labor is pending (not approved) on 6 years completion? My Employer says, in this scenario I have to depart USA for one year till the PERM is pending. What does it mean? Could you please give some more details about this scenario.
no, you can get an H1 extension as soon as the labor is 365 days old. No need to spend one year outside unless you want to reset your clock. SO get them to file this asap (lets say they file in August), if your labor approval does not come on time, in June you would have to leave the US for 2 months at which point they can again extend your H1 from August.
2. Would I get qualified for H1B Visa extension if Labor is approved before 6 years completion (i.e by June-2011)?
If you can get your I-140 approvla also by then. Just labor approval is not enough (unless it is 365 days old which it wont be in your case)
Kindly consider my situation and answer to my questions. Thank you in advance. I am very much worried and unable to concentrate at work because of the situation.
Regards,
swashbuckler
Hi,
This is the 6th year of my H1B visa going on and my max out calender date is in June-2011 (including the days spent outside USA). My Green Card application was supposed to file last year but because of economy and job market situation, my Employer did not apply at that time. Now my Employer is going to start GC processing in July/August-2010. But as per the DOL rules, my GC must have been applied before 365 days of max out calender date, to qualify for H1Bb Visa extension beyond 6 years. I have the questions below in this regard:
1. What happens if Labor is pending (not approved) on 6 years completion? My Employer says, in this scenario I have to depart USA for one year till the PERM is pending. What does it mean? Could you please give some more details about this scenario.
no, you can get an H1 extension as soon as the labor is 365 days old. No need to spend one year outside unless you want to reset your clock. SO get them to file this asap (lets say they file in August), if your labor approval does not come on time, in June you would have to leave the US for 2 months at which point they can again extend your H1 from August.
2. Would I get qualified for H1B Visa extension if Labor is approved before 6 years completion (i.e by June-2011)?
If you can get your I-140 approvla also by then. Just labor approval is not enough (unless it is 365 days old which it wont be in your case)
Kindly consider my situation and answer to my questions. Thank you in advance. I am very much worried and unable to concentrate at work because of the situation.
Regards,
swashbuckler
2011 Curtis Stone,Padma Lakshmi
BharatPremi
03-11 02:17 PM
Person "A" on H1B with 4 yrs of experience, Green Card filed, EAD received (both husband and wife), I-140 pending, Wife Dependant (has her own H1B), Wife opens a training institute.
1. Can "A" work for his wife and also get paid in check?
2. Can "A" have a second job in his wife's company and retain his original job?
3. Can "A" have a different occupation anywhere else on EAD not related to his original job role? and then can "A" get paid in check?
4. Can "A" work for his wife's company and instead wife gets the check or paid? Is that legal?
5. Can "A"'s wife open a company on EAD and also keep working on her H1B?
6. Can "A" and his wife after EAD work for 2 different jobs if the job description/roles are different?
7. Can "A" work as volunteer in his wife's company?
8. Can a software analyst working with a software company work as a trainer in a training institute on EAD with I-140 either pending or approved?
You are not DESI... How dare you to think about working for wife...Thst's not in true DESI's blood.. Wife should work for you:p:)
1. Can "A" work for his wife and also get paid in check?
2. Can "A" have a second job in his wife's company and retain his original job?
3. Can "A" have a different occupation anywhere else on EAD not related to his original job role? and then can "A" get paid in check?
4. Can "A" work for his wife's company and instead wife gets the check or paid? Is that legal?
5. Can "A"'s wife open a company on EAD and also keep working on her H1B?
6. Can "A" and his wife after EAD work for 2 different jobs if the job description/roles are different?
7. Can "A" work as volunteer in his wife's company?
8. Can a software analyst working with a software company work as a trainer in a training institute on EAD with I-140 either pending or approved?
You are not DESI... How dare you to think about working for wife...Thst's not in true DESI's blood.. Wife should work for you:p:)
more...
mohitb272
12-11 02:41 PM
hi mohit, my case is just the opposite, i joined as a Senior programmer, and my LC is filed as senior programmer and now I want to take up a job as a Business Analyst, not sure whether I can do it. See my case details in the signature. Thanks.
Hi there
I am asking the same question. I too want to take a job as a BA since that role is what I currently have for the last 4 yrs.
Are there any other ways to make this possible?
Hi there
I am asking the same question. I too want to take a job as a BA since that role is what I currently have for the last 4 yrs.
Are there any other ways to make this possible?
logiclife
06-08 06:05 PM
Premium processing is not against american values or any other values.
Just because its the government you are dealing with here instead of a private company does not mean there should not be options for faster service for extra fee.
If premium processing is against American values, then in that case, express-mail offered by USPS for extra charge is against American values. Express mail does not slow down first-class 39-cent mail but it provides an ALTERNATIVE to a consumer or citizen to go with better quality service for a fee. For a few dollars, you mail would reach somewhere overnight instead of 3 days.
Also, by that token, first-class travel is against American values? Would you rather that it go away too?
Premium processing is not going to slow down regular processing. But it offers an alternative to employers or employees if they want expedited service for extra money etc.
Just because its the government you are dealing with here instead of a private company does not mean there should not be options for faster service for extra fee.
If premium processing is against American values, then in that case, express-mail offered by USPS for extra charge is against American values. Express mail does not slow down first-class 39-cent mail but it provides an ALTERNATIVE to a consumer or citizen to go with better quality service for a fee. For a few dollars, you mail would reach somewhere overnight instead of 3 days.
Also, by that token, first-class travel is against American values? Would you rather that it go away too?
Premium processing is not going to slow down regular processing. But it offers an alternative to employers or employees if they want expedited service for extra money etc.
more...
Berkeleybee
05-11 09:16 PM
Amit's call starts at 13:00 minute of the program if you want to skip and listen directly to his message.
I'd encourage people to listen to the whole program it is overall good -- Jennifer Ludden also talks about the frustration of waiting and losing one's edge while we wait.
I'd encourage people to listen to the whole program it is overall good -- Jennifer Ludden also talks about the frustration of waiting and losing one's edge while we wait.
2010 images Curtis Stone leaving no
md2003
03-14 09:41 AM
If i140 is revoke by earlier employer , will it possible to port PD to new employer?.
more...
Raju
07-05 06:20 AM
Actually it would have been greater mess if they would have allowed to file 500 to 700k persons if that number is correct. Mainly those who are missing the bus due to marriage and other reasons would have suffered a lot. PD date movement
should be as accurate as possible or gc number should be increased. Or if they allow to file everyone then processing of application should be based on PD.
Senthil1,
You are wrong. I-485 approval is based on the combination of PD and RD. When a PD is current for an application then they look at RD. So if the dates retrogress after applying then the apps will sit on the shelves till the PD becomes current. You are stupid to think that just because a few people cannot apply, no one should be allowed to apply. There is a reason why they have to wait and you will find this kind of people all the time.
should be as accurate as possible or gc number should be increased. Or if they allow to file everyone then processing of application should be based on PD.
Senthil1,
You are wrong. I-485 approval is based on the combination of PD and RD. When a PD is current for an application then they look at RD. So if the dates retrogress after applying then the apps will sit on the shelves till the PD becomes current. You are stupid to think that just because a few people cannot apply, no one should be allowed to apply. There is a reason why they have to wait and you will find this kind of people all the time.
hair host Curtis Stone and GF
go_guy123
08-24 04:52 PM
ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
more...
dextro_a
02-05 02:24 PM
you have to give the H1 qualifying exam (I think Step 3), then you have to apply for Residency in universities. They all call you for personal interview, and the results are announced in mid march. Once you are selected, they'll process H1 for you. If you do not have step 3 cleared, then they'll process J1 visa for you. Most of these universities come under non-profit so, H1 quota is not a issue for them.
hot curtis stone and lindsay price. Lindsay Price amp; Curtis Stone Expecting
prem_goel
09-07 06:49 PM
the intent of Green card is to hire an immigrant since they did not file any suitable US Citizen. If your company has received a number of resumes and they are suitable for your position, then I don't believe the company and for that matter even you should move forward. I would suggest wait for a while if that's possible, and conduct the PERM process again once the market improves.
more...
house Curtis Stone picture gallery
gcformeornot
12-31 11:16 PM
vote..............
tattoo Curtis Stone picture gallery
NKR
03-06 04:21 PM
Guys:
Everyone is talking EB2....what are the prospects for EB3 - India??
Is it going to move forward..??
Good Luck..??
2002
Well.. Everybody stopped talking about EB2. It is predicted that EB2 will be unavailable till Oct 2008 and after that nobody knows how EB2 dates are going to move.
As for EB3, there could be a small movement of 2 to 3 months, I do not think there will be any more movement than that.
Everyone is talking EB2....what are the prospects for EB3 - India??
Is it going to move forward..??
Good Luck..??
2002
Well.. Everybody stopped talking about EB2. It is predicted that EB2 will be unavailable till Oct 2008 and after that nobody knows how EB2 dates are going to move.
As for EB3, there could be a small movement of 2 to 3 months, I do not think there will be any more movement than that.
more...
pictures Curtis Stone picture gallery
vadicherla
05-08 12:15 PM
Contribution $25 for this month.
Subscription Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #11R03083P3635964R)
In reference to: S-1RN47603HG965415U
Subscription Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #11R03083P3635964R)
In reference to: S-1RN47603HG965415U
dresses 2011 chef Curtis Stone. curtis
Templarian
08-26 12:00 PM
Yea, I was making a calvin( and hobbes, hobbes is to hard to make) during my lunch then my works video card shot (luckily i have 4 monitors so 2 still work or I would be screwed). Would be nice if when a video card blew it didn't shut down the entire thing :(
I'll make it when I get off of work.
I'll make it when I get off of work.
more...
makeup hair I predict Curtis Stone
b_boy
08-28 03:58 PM
Pending too
girlfriend curtis stone and lindsay price
drona
07-11 02:25 PM
Are any of you planning to go to this? Maybe a group of us could drive up there and show our support. I know its a long way but it's worth it (and SF is a beautiful city to visit) :) Maybe we could prepare banners and flyers here and take them with us.
hairstyles 2011 Now that Curtis Stone is
LostInGCProcess
06-17 05:05 PM
The thing is AC21 applies to you as long as your I-485 is pending - the exact wording.
The law allows you to change the job, but the job must be same or similar. Also, the law states, that the burden of proof lies on you, USCIS doesn't have to prove anything. So, if in the future (at time of citizenship or upon investigation) should they allege that you broke the law - you have to prove that you didn't.
In this case EVL, W2s, and paychecks is enough to prove.
The law allows you to change the job, but the job must be same or similar. Also, the law states, that the burden of proof lies on you, USCIS doesn't have to prove anything. So, if in the future (at time of citizenship or upon investigation) should they allege that you broke the law - you have to prove that you didn't.
In this case EVL, W2s, and paychecks is enough to prove.
wrldnw4me
01-31 10:29 AM
We are under Legal Slavery.
pappu
10-11 12:30 PM
The intent is to keep the issue of immigration alive till the elections so that there is a chance for any Immigration bill after elections. There are several other pressing issues faced by the nation and Immigration is just one of them. It may not be #1 priority now. The lameduck is very important if something needs to be done on Immigration. The results of Nov elections will also influence what kind of Immigration reform is possible. There is also pressure on the President to act on such national issues. Read Obama Is in the Jaws of Political Death: Can He Survive? - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599202471800)
No comments:
Post a Comment