Immigration Voice - Forums
Register Get Involved Contact Lawmakers Advocacy Discussion Image Image Image Image

Go Back   Immigration Voice > Immigration Voice Issues and Congressional updates > All other Green Card Issues
Click to log in with Facebook
All other Green Card Issues I-140/I-485, Family Based Green Card

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2010, 12:07 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jun-06
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 643
gcformeornot will become famous soon enough
Angry New Blow for some H1Bs.....

From ImmInfo.com website.........

ImmInfo Newsletter: An H1B who works at a job site for which there is not a valid LCA violates his or her status.

An H1B who works at a job site for which there is not
a valid LCA violates his or her status.

Recently, the CIS has started making inquiries of pending adjustment of status applicants about their H1B status. The law provides that an employment based AOS applicant may have up to 180 days of status violations since their last entry prior to application and remain eligible to adjust status. While the filing of an AOS application cuts off continuing status violations, if the AOS applicant works without authorization after filing, however, that counts toward the total 180 days of status violations permitted. Once the applicant exceeds a total of 180 days of status violations, the applicant becomes statutorily ineligible to adjust status.

One of the issues that CIS has focused on recently is whether H1B holders who changed job sites maintained lawful status. A labor condition application (LCA) is generally valid only for the job site named. If the new job site is within "normal commuting distance" (generally defined as 35 miles) of the original job site, the LCA can remain valid. If the new site is beyond that distance, or if there is a significant change in the terms and conditions of employment, then a new LCA is required.

In a case decided in federal court some years ago (CDI Information Services, Inc. v. Reno, 101 F. Supp. 2d 546, 549 (E.D. Mich. 2000), the court dealt with this issue. In that case, the court held that the beneficiary:

"failed to maintain his status previously accorded because he engaged in unauthorized employment in a state other than ... the one stated on the LCA."

The sole basis for this finding was that the H1B beneficiary worked at a job site for which the employer had not received a certified LCA.

In that employers are required by law to provide H1B employees with copies of all certified LCAs bearing on their employment, it will be difficult for an employee to claim that he or she had no knowledge of the employer's failure. Employees are presumed to know that valid LCAs are a necessary component of valid H1B employment authorization. The absence of an LCA when the employee moves to a new job site should set off an alarm telling the employee to verify that the employer complied with the law.

Failure to exercise this kind of due diligence could result in the employee's subsequent application for adjustment of status being denied on the basis that the employee engaged in unauthorized employment.

Last edited by gcformeornot; 05-02-2010 at 04:21 PM.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2010, 12:11 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jul-07
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 192
ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute ndbhatt has a reputation beyond repute
Default Link fixed

Quote:
Originally Posted by gcformeornot View Post
ImmInfo Newsletter: An H1B who works at a job site for which there is not a valid LCA violates his or her status.
__________________
Arrived in the USA on H1B in April 2005: Company A; Labor Filed - EB2, July 07 | I-140 approved July 2008
Change of Employer to Company B in Oct 2007: Labor Filed - EB3, Sept 08 | I-140 approved June 2009

Finally moved to Canada at the end of June, 2012
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #3 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2010, 12:37 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Mar-03
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
11/12/2005
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/01/2007
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 114
abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute abhishek101 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

This was always illegal to work at other place where your LCA is not approved. My lawyer made us alter H1b even when we moved between cities in Bay Area , CA.

They must have started enforcing it now, but nothing new about it.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #4 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2010, 01:10 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jun-06
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 643
gcformeornot will become famous soon enough
Default well

everybody knows this was requirement... but imagine how many people applied during July2007 and previously were following it. I mean before 2008 USCIS was hardly looking at LCA violations. Imagine how many 485s will be in trouble.... all those who filed with Desi companies...who took shortcuts in any way they can....
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2010, 01:35 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 6
gg123 has a spectacular aura about gg123 has a spectacular aura about gg123 has a spectacular aura about
Default

For a person who is on H1B who works at a job site should always must have a valid LCA violates his or her status. This is always a rule for H1-B. Therefore there is no change recently. Kindly do not confuse people with these kind of postings.

Some desi companis always followed shortcuts -

For example,

Some desi consulting employees misused the H1 regulations and we are all paying the penalty.

Some desi companies allowed people on L1 to go and work at the client site.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2010, 01:40 PM
Donor
Priority Date
:
N/A
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 641
eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute eastindia has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Why is everyone worried when USCIS is now following the law. It is hypocritical to think that all laws that favor me should be followed and USCIS should ignore all enforcement rules. We want USCIS to follow the law and not waste visas. But we want USCIS not follow the law in certain places.

It is high time desi consulting companies giving everyone a bad name fold their operations. Both the owners and employees working for these companies are responsible for giving H1B visa a bad name.

Last edited by eastindia; 05-01-2010 at 01:43 PM.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2010, 01:43 PM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 6
gg123 has a spectacular aura about gg123 has a spectacular aura about gg123 has a spectacular aura about
Default

You are absolutely correct. For example, Substitution labour also was allowed until July 2007. Lots and lots of people used it (although it is permitted by law). Substitution labour should have been banned long ago. But desi companies sold these kind of labour substitutions.

People like us who are standing in the line for ever are taken for granted.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #8 (permalink)  
Old 05-01-2010, 06:06 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
N/A
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 369
Blog Entries: 3
godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute godspeed has a reputation beyond repute
Default dont know if this is a real issue

Neufeld memo it explains the issue raised by OP
__________________
------------------------------------------------------------------
Permanent Resident of USA since 07/01/2010
Help IV to help you
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #9 (permalink)  
Old 05-02-2010, 02:27 AM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5
mjdm_07 is infamous around these parts mjdm_07 is infamous around these parts mjdm_07 is infamous around these parts
Default Legal Immigration reform

If people are serious about not wasting precious years of their lives, then we need a better plan and execution. If undocumented immigrants can fight for their right, then it's quite unfortunate that a substantial no. of perfectly legal immigrants, contributing significantly to the society for decades, have surrendered their lives and fates to a dysfunctional system based on arcane laws.

Now that the only remaining hope for a change is CIR is pitiful, because itís a classic case where hard-working and law abiding people are hoping to get rights in the same order as the people who jumped over the fence. This is a result of inaction and passivity, which is normally rewarded by deprivation of rights.

At this rate, one day probably felons and terrorists will be better rights in this country than perfectly legal immigrants from certain countries. IVís approach of polite request to the goodwill of politicians is not working for a decade. Therefore I believe that a change in approach is reasonable to seek at this point.

If the same amount (or more) effort /qualification of certain group of people yields significantly worse result from that of another group, only because of national origin, then the system can be proven to be discriminatory towards national origin. Therefore this can be challenged under the constitutional framework, as well as under human rights. So the possibility of a legal challenge is not totally unfounded.

But we need active support (both financial and effort) of members for that. Therefore I believe that itís time to survey across IV community, whether majority is content with passively watching the status quo or willing to take more active role and try for a change.

My personal belief is that a significant number of IV members have reached the threshold of patience, and looking forward to take more proactive role and try for a change. So please voice your opinion on what you thing IVís direction of movement should be at this point, and whether you are willing to take an active role and try for a change.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 05-03-2010, 09:39 AM
Member
Priority Date
:
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Processing Stage
:
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute ravi98 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjdm_07 View Post
If people are serious about not wasting precious years of their lives, then we need a better plan and execution. If undocumented immigrants can fight for their right, then it's quite unfortunate that a substantial no. of perfectly legal immigrants, contributing significantly to the society for decades, have surrendered their lives and fates to a dysfunctional system based on arcane laws.

Now that the only remaining hope for a change is CIR is pitiful, because itís a classic case where hard-working and law abiding people are hoping to get rights in the same order as the people who jumped over the fence. This is a result of inaction and passivity, which is normally rewarded by deprivation of rights.

At this rate, one day probably felons and terrorists will be better rights in this country than perfectly legal immigrants from certain countries. IVís approach of polite request to the goodwill of politicians is not working for a decade. Therefore I believe that a change in approach is reasonable to seek at this point.

If the same amount (or more) effort /qualification of certain group of people yields significantly worse result from that of another group, only because of national origin, then the system can be proven to be discriminatory towards national origin. Therefore this can be challenged under the constitutional framework, as well as under human rights. So the possibility of a legal challenge is not totally unfounded.

But we need active support (both financial and effort) of members for that. Therefore I believe that itís time to survey across IV community, whether majority is content with passively watching the status quo or willing to take more active role and try for a change.

My personal belief is that a significant number of IV members have reached the threshold of patience, and looking forward to take more proactive role and try for a change. So please voice your opinion on what you thing IVís direction of movement should be at this point, and whether you are willing to take an active role and try for a change.
First of all, do you know what and how IV is working on?
Second of all, what actions do you propose - give the alternate solutions
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #11 (permalink)  
Old 05-03-2010, 10:08 AM
Donor
Priority Date
:
May-02
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
05/20/2006
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
06/11/2007
Compare
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 118
sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute sameer2730 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravi98 View Post
First of all, do you know what and how IV is working on?
Second of all, what actions do you propose - give the alternate solutions

Admins,

Can you please close this thread. It was a ploy to get more traffic and now Ron Gotcher is using this to attract traffic to his website. Read the whole article for god's sake. Its just propaganda.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #12 (permalink)  
Old 05-14-2010, 11:46 AM
Junior Member
Priority Date
:
Jul-03
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7
mishras is infamous around these parts mishras is infamous around these parts
Default

Hi Sameer,

this is not a plot, we have received this query, and are looking for some help and advice.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #13 (permalink)  
Old 05-14-2010, 12:35 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
N/A
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 433
greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute greyhair has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mishras View Post
Hi Sameer,

this is not a plot, we have received this query, and are looking for some help and advice.
When my first employer sent me papers for H1 stamping in 2000, I immediately saw the LCA attached to the copy of the H1 petition. I wrote back to him saying that it doesn't right that my project/place of work is in a different city than the one mentioned in the H1 application LCA. The HR dept of the company then contacted the law firm that had processed my H1. The law firm replied back saying they already have the LCA for the city of my place of my work/client. My employer back then was one of the largest Big 6 consulting companies. This was back in 2000, even before I had landed in US.

There is nothing new about this rule about getting approved LCA for the place of work/client. And it takes just couple of days to get approved LCA back then. Now it takes 1 day to get approved LCA. Every immigration lawyer is supposed to know this and advise his/her clients accordingly. I have ZERO respect for the immigration lawyer who don't already know this and is now pretending as if this is some sort of big change in the rule by sending such newsletters pretending this is something new. These ignorant lawyers practicing immigration law representing their client and screwing the lives of people like us should be reported to the State Bar Association. Its also the fault of the employer to not get approved LCA of a city before asking its employees on H1 to work for a client in that place.

Last edited by greyhair; 05-14-2010 at 12:40 PM. Reason: minor edits
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #14 (permalink)  
Old 05-29-2010, 05:24 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jun-06
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 643
gcformeornot will become famous soon enough
Default see reply from Murthy Law

Urgent Notice of Intent to Deny I-485, LCA amendment not filed - Topic Powered by Infopop


Quote:
Murthy Law Firm Attorney 6
Attorney posted May 29, 2010 12:34 PM
Call the Murthy Law Firm after the holiday weekend and get some help.
We have started to see this issue. The USCIS trying to deny I-485s due to LCA failures. The reason the LCAs aren't proper, usually, is that the employer relocated the person w/o doing a new LCA. The employee usually has no idea, since the LCA is the employer's filing and there used to be a lot less attention/awareness about LCA issues.

We have developed a number of arguments regarding this matter....including the "no fault of your own" concept and arguments regarding status violations vs LCA violations etc. This is a new development.

The reason why it is important is that it is necessary to be in status when filing the I-485. Prior status violations exceeding 180 days prior to or after filing the I-485 are grounds for I-485 denials.
It is a complicated topic. If the USCIS persists in this matter, there are going to be a lot of cases with this type of problem.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lou Dobbs is leaving CNN - How big of a Blow to Anti Immigration Media? Blog Feeds Recent Blogs 6 11-13-2009 05:00 PM
Another Blow:Proposal to End Concurrent I-140/I-485 Filings aspiration IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 46 05-21-2008 07:26 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c)ImmigrationVoice.org