sankar_203
04-01 04:54 PM
Hello folks,
i need some expert opinion here. These are my primary details.
COMPANY A:
1. Perm Labor - Nov 2006. (EB2)
2. I-140 approved - Nov 2007
3. I-485 filed - July 2007.
4 EAD - oct 2007
5 FP - Nov 2007
6 AP - Oct 2007
H1-B extension denied in dec 2007 due to variety of company A issues.
Invoked AC21 yesterday with company B.
COMPANY B: Bought substitution labor of Feb 2004 EB3.
I-140 filed : NSC : paper based filing no documents has been sent waiting for RFE on July 13 2007.
But my labor substitute on 140 has been used for somebody else by mistake and now company B says they have few other labors to substitute and they say we'll respond to the query saying that the original one has been used and please consider the second one. Attorney has made this mistake since many labors were filed at that time and the labor that they have used for me has been approved . Do you guys whatever the attorney is suggesting is going to work? Please let me know i haven't got an RFE yet..
i need some expert opinion here. These are my primary details.
COMPANY A:
1. Perm Labor - Nov 2006. (EB2)
2. I-140 approved - Nov 2007
3. I-485 filed - July 2007.
4 EAD - oct 2007
5 FP - Nov 2007
6 AP - Oct 2007
H1-B extension denied in dec 2007 due to variety of company A issues.
Invoked AC21 yesterday with company B.
COMPANY B: Bought substitution labor of Feb 2004 EB3.
I-140 filed : NSC : paper based filing no documents has been sent waiting for RFE on July 13 2007.
But my labor substitute on 140 has been used for somebody else by mistake and now company B says they have few other labors to substitute and they say we'll respond to the query saying that the original one has been used and please consider the second one. Attorney has made this mistake since many labors were filed at that time and the labor that they have used for me has been approved . Do you guys whatever the attorney is suggesting is going to work? Please let me know i haven't got an RFE yet..
wallpaper Derrick Rose scores 39 points,
seahawks
09-12 11:41 PM
28 members and counting! yippee...
vinzak
06-17 12:45 PM
I'm not a lawyer so please don't take my thoughts as the ultimate truth.
It's illegal for you to work on an F1. But it's not illegal for you to be a sleeping partner in a business. So I guess you can setup a company with a citizen/GC partner and sell yr app thru that and collect the proceeds as dividends.
Or you can also register a company in your home country and sell the app through that. So technically u wouldn't be making money in the US.
There are a million ways around these laws. The question is are you gonna make a lot of money? If you are, you can afford lawyers up the wazoo to make yr case.
So pursue yr dreams and stop worrying about silly things like immigration laws if you have a big idea.
For inspiration, look up Phillipe Kahn on wiki. He started working as an illegal immigrant programmer for HP, and became one of the greatest forces in software.
Hope that helps.
It's illegal for you to work on an F1. But it's not illegal for you to be a sleeping partner in a business. So I guess you can setup a company with a citizen/GC partner and sell yr app thru that and collect the proceeds as dividends.
Or you can also register a company in your home country and sell the app through that. So technically u wouldn't be making money in the US.
There are a million ways around these laws. The question is are you gonna make a lot of money? If you are, you can afford lawyers up the wazoo to make yr case.
So pursue yr dreams and stop worrying about silly things like immigration laws if you have a big idea.
For inspiration, look up Phillipe Kahn on wiki. He started working as an illegal immigrant programmer for HP, and became one of the greatest forces in software.
Hope that helps.
2011 when Derrick Rose#39;s
actonwang
06-16 02:05 PM
it sounds like PD is a MUST for approval but for actual processing order , as in backlog queue, it seems purely by luck :(
more...
chalamurariusa
04-28 10:02 AM
Some one please advice!!!!!!
nochoice
12-17 12:01 PM
Suman,
Several members have raised important questions to you, but you have not responded to them. Since you started this thread, I think you owe responsibility to answer these questions.
Several members have raised important questions to you, but you have not responded to them. Since you started this thread, I think you owe responsibility to answer these questions.
more...
vijse
12-16 11:58 AM
I got it correct yesterday .
Thanks for the advice.
Thanks for the advice.
2010 derrick rose bulls.
gjoe
08-20 08:44 PM
:)
more...
smitin_2000
02-09 11:34 PM
Hi,
I have issue with I-94 as visa office at LA - LAX port of entry put a date in I-94 as same as in visa stamp in passport and not the date in the I-797 (extended H1B approval notice), I realised it 2months after the I-94 expiry, means while I was moved to Bay Area in CA, so I took infopass appointment from uscis.gov site for San Francisco office, went there and explained the matter to the visa officer, they corrected the error and issued me new I-94 with the date in I-797, you can also try the same, I think your issue will be fixed.
Best of luck
CBP office location link in CA
LA - http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/toolbox/contacts/cmcs/cmc_south_pacific.xml
San Diego - http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/toolbox/contacts/cmcs/cmc_s_ca.xml
San Francisco - http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/toolbox/contacts/cmcs/cmc_mid_pac.xml
Regards,
Smitin
I have issue with I-94 as visa office at LA - LAX port of entry put a date in I-94 as same as in visa stamp in passport and not the date in the I-797 (extended H1B approval notice), I realised it 2months after the I-94 expiry, means while I was moved to Bay Area in CA, so I took infopass appointment from uscis.gov site for San Francisco office, went there and explained the matter to the visa officer, they corrected the error and issued me new I-94 with the date in I-797, you can also try the same, I think your issue will be fixed.
Best of luck
CBP office location link in CA
LA - http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/toolbox/contacts/cmcs/cmc_south_pacific.xml
San Diego - http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/toolbox/contacts/cmcs/cmc_s_ca.xml
San Francisco - http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/toolbox/contacts/cmcs/cmc_mid_pac.xml
Regards,
Smitin
hair derrick rose tattoos on arm.
Leo07
05-21 05:18 PM
'American Nava Nirman Sena' Ticket---LOL:)
July 2009
July 2010
July 2011
July 2012...or
By the way things are moving backwards, We will be awarded GC posthumously in a Rose Garden Ceremony by the President (who will be my son since he was born here and eligible to be come President. He will be contesting elections in 2060 under 'American Nava Nirman Sena' Ticket).
July 2009
July 2010
July 2011
July 2012...or
By the way things are moving backwards, We will be awarded GC posthumously in a Rose Garden Ceremony by the President (who will be my son since he was born here and eligible to be come President. He will be contesting elections in 2060 under 'American Nava Nirman Sena' Ticket).
more...
looivy
02-22 03:42 PM
just curious. Are you working for a consulting company?
I do not.
I do not.
hot derrick rose bulls playoffs.
rvr_jcop
03-27 12:51 PM
I feel the same... but I'm not sure if I am ready to go back just yet. I spent beyond my means to get my masters and spent a couple of years just paying it back.
I might have some left in me to try again one more time and hoping that some reforms would happen which would help me then.
But yeah, I am not sure if I'll really go after that h1 if I have to go for stamping now.
pal :)
Oh, and also, consider the 'risk' involved in the underlying 485. If you have everything in place and all the documents such as LCA are proper, proved A2P etc...then the risk should be negligible. But again, you know that better than us. Good Luck.
In my case, I decided enough is enough. I am going back 'home' should something happen to my 485., in fact with a big smile.
I might have some left in me to try again one more time and hoping that some reforms would happen which would help me then.
But yeah, I am not sure if I'll really go after that h1 if I have to go for stamping now.
pal :)
Oh, and also, consider the 'risk' involved in the underlying 485. If you have everything in place and all the documents such as LCA are proper, proved A2P etc...then the risk should be negligible. But again, you know that better than us. Good Luck.
In my case, I decided enough is enough. I am going back 'home' should something happen to my 485., in fact with a big smile.
more...
house derrick rose tattoos on his
nave_kum
07-19 09:26 PM
[QUOTE=srsrsr]Hello everyone!
I am planning to apply I-140 and I-485 simultaneously. My problem is, Can I change my job after 180 days of applying my I-485 and without using my EAD? I am not married yet and I have a valid H1B. Please help!
Thanks,
Raj[/QUOTE
If u dont use ur EAD for the first 6 months, then u can join the new employer any time using ur H1B. But immediately after the date of EAD activation, u will need to stick with the corresponding employer for the next 6 mnths.
I am planning to apply I-140 and I-485 simultaneously. My problem is, Can I change my job after 180 days of applying my I-485 and without using my EAD? I am not married yet and I have a valid H1B. Please help!
Thanks,
Raj[/QUOTE
If u dont use ur EAD for the first 6 months, then u can join the new employer any time using ur H1B. But immediately after the date of EAD activation, u will need to stick with the corresponding employer for the next 6 mnths.
tattoo derrick rose tattoos 2011.
calif
10-29 03:59 PM
which service center?
Give a try if they can update it.
Give a try if they can update it.
more...
pictures derrick rose mvp images.
gc_kaavaali
06-28 04:02 PM
So many times discussed about this topic. As soon as you start using EAD you are done with H1. You are no longer on H1. You need to give all prior I-94's when you are leaving US.
I am one of the July 2007 485 filer.
Me and wife have EAD's which we are using right now on I-9's to work.
I have an expired H1 stamp on passport.
Wife too has expired H4 stamp on passport.
I have a valid h1b approval notice until 5/31/2013
Wife too has a valid h4 approval notice until 5/31/2013
I have an AP which is valid for 1 year from today.
I want to visit India for a marriage.
Questions I have:
- While exiting USA, do they take my I-94 ?
- While coming back, if I show my AP, does my H1 status cancels out?
- Given the sad situation of our GC's. but the fact that I have H1 approval, should I simply goto consulate in mumbai, and re-enter on h1? Someone said on this forum that one can have only 1 status, h1 or parole. So if I enter on h1, will that invalidate my Adjustment of status?
- Entering back on h1 stamp, will give me 3 years of least headache, cos I wont have to renew AP every year.
- Entering back on h1, will keep my wife's H4 valid too.
So question is should I enter back on H1 or AP?
I am one of the July 2007 485 filer.
Me and wife have EAD's which we are using right now on I-9's to work.
I have an expired H1 stamp on passport.
Wife too has expired H4 stamp on passport.
I have a valid h1b approval notice until 5/31/2013
Wife too has a valid h4 approval notice until 5/31/2013
I have an AP which is valid for 1 year from today.
I want to visit India for a marriage.
Questions I have:
- While exiting USA, do they take my I-94 ?
- While coming back, if I show my AP, does my H1 status cancels out?
- Given the sad situation of our GC's. but the fact that I have H1 approval, should I simply goto consulate in mumbai, and re-enter on h1? Someone said on this forum that one can have only 1 status, h1 or parole. So if I enter on h1, will that invalidate my Adjustment of status?
- Entering back on h1 stamp, will give me 3 years of least headache, cos I wont have to renew AP every year.
- Entering back on h1, will keep my wife's H4 valid too.
So question is should I enter back on H1 or AP?
dresses derrick rose mvp pictures.
indyanguy
01-16 10:39 AM
I received a RFE on experience letters (EB3). I have searched everywhere but haven't found the format for a winning experience letter.
Can someone with an approved 140 please paste a format of the experience letter on this thread?
Thanks!
Can someone with an approved 140 please paste a format of the experience letter on this thread?
Thanks!
more...
makeup derrick rose mvp 2011
reddy2cool
08-21 08:19 PM
My suggestion is unless its giving u a great improvement(atleast 30-40% diff total compensation wise) over the current job and your current employer is not even acceptably reasonable Pl stick with your current employer since you waited so long why do u want to trash it now?your much needed freedom will come eventually(according to vdlrao and many other senior members
eb2 will move at great pace through out next year)and you are close to it than ever.
eb2 will move at great pace through out next year)and you are close to it than ever.
girlfriend derrick rose tattoos on arm.
GCard_Dream
06-29 03:58 PM
It is a shady practice. The main reason an employer wouldn't give you a copy of a I-140 is that if you were to leave company A and company B sponsors you for GC, you can keep your old priority date. But that is only possible if you can furnish a copy of approved I-140 to INS. It is such a stupid practice on part of INS to request the petitioner to provide a copy of something (like I-140) that they themselves approved and should already have a record of. But I don't think anyone expects any better from INS anyway.
I agree that it is a employer driven petition but the employer purposely holds the information back so that they have more control over the employees decision making ( specially if the employee is thinking about leaving the company).
This is not a shady practice. The employer had petitioned for a labor certification earlier to sponsor GC for an employee who might have left the company. Now they filled the position with you, so its perfectly alright to use the same petition for you.
As far as the documents are concerned, they are employer centric and they have no reason to give them to you. You will have nothing to do with those even if you get them. If the only purpose you want to solve is to know whether or not your labor and I40 were infact approved as your employer says, you should request your employer to show you a copy.
The copies are wothless to you if you leave the company anyways, before you get an EAD.
Don't heed the advise of people who ask you to find a better employer. Such people are only trying to get their own GCs faster, since there will be one less person with an earlier priority date.
I agree that it is a employer driven petition but the employer purposely holds the information back so that they have more control over the employees decision making ( specially if the employee is thinking about leaving the company).
This is not a shady practice. The employer had petitioned for a labor certification earlier to sponsor GC for an employee who might have left the company. Now they filled the position with you, so its perfectly alright to use the same petition for you.
As far as the documents are concerned, they are employer centric and they have no reason to give them to you. You will have nothing to do with those even if you get them. If the only purpose you want to solve is to know whether or not your labor and I40 were infact approved as your employer says, you should request your employer to show you a copy.
The copies are wothless to you if you leave the company anyways, before you get an EAD.
Don't heed the advise of people who ask you to find a better employer. Such people are only trying to get their own GCs faster, since there will be one less person with an earlier priority date.
hairstyles derrick rose mvp pictures.
SunnySurya
08-21 02:45 PM
Yes that is correct!
Here you go. Are you one of the air signs ? :D
If your answer is yes I will guess you sign
Here you go. Are you one of the air signs ? :D
If your answer is yes I will guess you sign
gconmymind
07-29 02:51 PM
Are you sure Systems Analyst and Director of Development are considered "similar" jobs? To me it does not sound like similar jobs. Systems Analyst is a technical job whereas Director is purely managerial position.
Let me know if you have documentation on "same/similar".
Let me know if you have documentation on "same/similar".
krishna_brc
05-05 08:54 AM
Yes, we don't need original I-485 receipt notice to travel.
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
No comments:
Post a Comment