CASE:  Request to Join in a Motion to Reopen
CLIENT: Pakistani
LOCATION: Houston, TX

Our client is a Pakistani citizen who currently resides in Houston, Texas with her U.S. Citizen husband.  Our client entered the United States on a valid L-2 visa in November 2000.  She was  then granted withholding of removal in July 2006 by the Philadelphia Immigration Court as a derivative beneficiary of her father’s sought relief.  In March 2009, our client married her U.S. citizen husband and her husband filed an I-130 petition on behalf of our client.  The I-130 petition was approved in October, 2010.  However, due to bad advice by their previous counsel, they also filed an I-485 application with the USCIS which was understandably denied due to lack of jurisdiction considering she is in withholding of removal status.  They were not informed that our client’s case should first be reopened in the Immigration Court before she can apply for adjustment of status either with the Court, or with the CIS should proceedings be terminated after reopening.

In March 2011, our client and her U.S. citizen husband contacted our office and sought legal assistance for her immigration matters. Our client retained us on March 29, 2011.  Upon retention, we filed a Request to Join in a Motion to Reopen to the USICE-DHS office in Philadelphia.  Our cover brief explained the withholding of removal status, the approval of the I-130, and other equitable factors totaling 28 exhibits.

We called the DHS office in Philadelphia several times and on November 23, 2011, they finally agreed to join in the Motion to Reopen and an assigned counsel signed the Joint Motion. Now our client can apply for Adjustment of Status with the Immigration Court, or with the CIS upon a possible termination by the Court.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other success stories, please click here.

Also feel free to contact our office anytime for free immigration consultations.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: H-1B Visa Petition (Change of Employer)
PETITIONER:  Hotel-Chain Company
BENEFICIARY: Hotel General Manager

Our client is the nation’s fastest-growing extended hotel stay chain company in Ohio. They contacted our office in early June to seek legal assistance from our office for their foreign employee.  The beneficiary is from Pakistan and has extensive work history in the United States as a General Manager in one of the leading brand hotels for 13 years.  This proffered position is a “specialty occupation” because the minimum requirement for this position are a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration / Hotel Management or equivalent.

The foreign beneficiary in this case already had his H-1B visa from his previous employer in a similar industry.  However, his H-1B visa was not expired yet, and he wanted to extend his H-1B status based on a change in employer.

Once retained, our office promptly filed the H-1B visa petition with various supporting documents on June 20, 2011 via regular processing.  Since this petition was based on a change in employer, it was exempted from the annual H-1B cap.  On August 12, 2011, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) regarding his past pay stubs to evidence his continued H-1B status. During the validity of his previous H-1B status, his previous employer was acquired but everything pertaining to his position, from the duties to the location to the salary, stayed the same. But he did not file an amendment of his H-1B.  In response to that issue, our office promptly filed a Response to the RFE on August 30, 2011 which included the paystubs from the previous two employers. We cited INA § 214(c)(9)(A)(ii) which states that “an amended H-1B petition shall not be required where the petitioning employer is involved in a corporate restructuring, including but not limited to a merger, acquisition, or consolidation, where a new corporate entity succeeds to the interests and obligations of the original petitioning employer and where the terms and conditions of employment remain the same but for the identity of the petitioner.”

Eventually, our client’s H-1B Petition was approved on September 20, 2011.  Moreover, the Beneficiary’s wife and minor son’s H-4 status was properly changed as well. Now the Beneficiary can continue working for his Petitioner-Employer as an H-1B visa holder until 2013.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For other H-1B success stories, please click here.

For other success stories, please click here.

Also feel free to contact our office for free consultations.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: PERM and EB-2 I-140
PETITIONER: Professional Services Staffing Company
BENEFICIARY: Pakistani
LOCATION: Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Our Pakistani client contacted our office in December 2010. He called from Houston Texas. A potential employer headquartered in Sacramento California wanted to hire him as an Operations Research Analyst for their office in Baton Rouge Louisiana. Our had questions regarding may possible issues they may face, including the headquarters being in a different location and the fact that their 2010 tax return shows more than a negative $300,000 taxable income. Prior to the company retaining our office, we made sure the case was winnable and asked them to fax us some documentation to assess the feasibility of the I-140, especially the “ability to pay” issue. We reviewed the documents (still part of the free consultation) and told them it could be done. The company thus retained us to do an EB-2 Labor Certification (PERM) and I-140 for our client.

All the pre-PERM filing steps were executed quickly, from the prevailing wage request, job order, advertisements, and internal job posting. Specific rules pertaining to these steps in Louisiana were also reviewed thoroughly prior to execution. We then filed the Labor Certification on March 7, 2011 and on May 2, 2011, the application was certified and approved.

We then proceeded with the I-140. One of the main requirements for the I-140 is that the petitioning company must show that it has the ability to pay the proffered wage for the beneficiary’s position. Despite the negative taxable income, we provided all schedules of Petitioner’s tax return and argued that their net current assets are over and above the proffered wage. We provided the calculation on the cover letter, cited a CIS internal memo on the “ability to pay” issue, and attached the tax return schedule that showed the net current assets. The I-140 was filed on June 16, 2011 and on July 27, 2011, the I-140 was approved.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

For all other success stories, please click here.

Feel free to contact our office anytime for any questions. Our office provides free consultations.

{ 0 comments }

CASE: PERM Labor Certification
EMPLOYER: Professional Services Staffing Company
BENEFICIARY: Pakistani
LOCATION: Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Our client is a Computer Engineer who had a Professional Staffing Company willing to petition him for an second-preference petition. Second preference petitions for Pakistanis are current, which means that if a PERM Labor Certification for a second preference position gets approved, the I-140 and I-485 could be filed simultaneously. After talking to our client, our firm concluded that his potential employer can petition him as an operations research analyst, which is an EB2 position. We were retained in the last week of December.

Prior to filing PERM, our firm prepared the prevailing wage request, job order, advertisements, internal job posting, recruitment report, and all other steps which are important pre-PERM filing. Take note that PERM could be filed at least 60 days from the job posting date or 30 days from the last ad. Within a week from our retention, the prevailing wage request and the job order were both immediately filed. Thus the earliest we could file was around the first week of March. On March 7, 2011, we promptly filed PERM. On April 27, 2011, less than two months from filing, the PERM Labor Certification was approved – an EB2 position for the Pakistani beneficiary. Now were on to the next step which is filing the I-140, I-485, and I-765 simultaneously.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Our client is a Pakistani national who was on valid H-B Status when we met him at our New York office in September 2010. He was married to a US Citizen and wanted to apply for a marriage-based immigrant petition and green card application. He retained our firm, we prepared all the paperwork, and on October 14, 2010 the I-130 Petition and I-485 Application were filed. On December 9, 2010, our client’s work authorization card was issued and approved. There were no Requests for Evidence for his case. On February 16, 2011, the CIS issued an interview notice scheduled for March 15, 2011 in New York City. Prior to their interview, we prepared them extensively on possible questions the officer may ask. The interview was then held on March 15, 2011 and on that same day, the CIS officer issued an I-130 approval notice. On March 31, 2011, our client’s I-485 approval notice was then issued. He is now a permanent resident of the United States.

To view our firm’s success stories, please click here. Also feel free to contact our firm for a free consultation.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

CASE: I-130 and Consular Processing – Marriage-Petition

CLIENT: Indian

LOCATION: Petitioner: Cleveland Ohio; Beneficiary: Pakistan

Our client is a U.S. citizen who married a Pakistani lady in Pakistan. He had his marriage ceremony with his wife in Pakistan, so he wanted to file an Immigrant visa for his wife by filing an I-130 petition.  It is important to note that an alien cannot adjust his or her status (gets a green card) outside U.S. by filing I-130 and I-485 simultaneously. The Petitioner also had questions on the fact that he was married before and filed an I-130 Petition for his previous wife. We explained that as long as that marriage was bona fide and the second one is bona fide (in good faith), there should be no problem.  Since the client’s wife was not in the United States, and their marriage occurred in Pakistan, our office promptly filed the I-130 and I-129K (for the wife’s K-3 visa) to the National Visa Center. 

The I-130 and I-129K were filed on May 21, 2010 to National Visa Center in New Hampshire.  Everything went smoothly and the receipt notices came on time. After the I-130 approval, we filed the immigrant visa packets to the National Visa Center, who in turn forwarded client’s materials to the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan. An interview notice was set for the client at the US Embassy in Islamabad, and we prepared her for her interview. On November 29, 2010, the beneficiary went to her interview in Islamabad, Pakistan and the officer right after informed them that the case was to be approved.

With the approved Immigrant visa, our client’s wife can come to the United States immediately, and she will get her green card.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

CASE: Change of Status from H-4 to F-1

CLIENT: Pakistani

LOCATION: Columbus, Ohio

Our client has been on H-4 status for many years. Those on H-4 get their status from being the under-21 child or spouse of someone on an H-1B temporary worker status. His father’s H-1B was extended, but his H-4 extension was cut short of the extension approval of his father because he was about to turn 21. Those on H-4 are allowed to study in the United States. Our client’s father wanted him to continue his studies in preparation for medical school and was concerned because his son’s H-4 status was cut short. Our firm was retained and we helped the client obtain supporting documents for the Change of Status. On September 20, 2010, before our client turned 21, we filed the I-539 Change of Status. On October 15, 2010, the Change of Status was approved. Our client is now on F-1 and can continue his pre-med studies.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

CASE: H-1B Extension With Potential Specialty Occupation Issues
TYPE OF PETITIONER: Hotel
POSITION: Hotel General Manager
LOCATION: Ohio

Our client is a Pakistani national who has been on H-1B status for over 8 years. His H-1B had been extended for one year at a time for the past two years. Within the past year, an I-140 Petition was approved with him as the beneficiary. He consulted with our office regarding filing an extension. Our office reviewed his documents and with the approved I-140, informed him that the H-1B extension would be a 3-year extension. Another issue is his position – that of a hotel general manager. For this year, the position is deemed under ONET classifications as a Job Zone 3 position which does not require a bachelor’s degree. Unless we can persuade the USCIS that a hotel general manager for the Petitioner is a “specialty occupation” the H-1B may be denied. Upon discussing the case with the Petitioner regarding the specific description of the position, we prepared a detailed employment letter together with a more extensive cover letter to argue upfront that the hotel general manager in this instance is a specialty occupation, that the position is so complex that it requires someone possessing at least a Bachelors Degree. The I-140 approval was also attached and a portion of the cover letter cited the AC-21 regulation allowing for a 3-year extension. On April 15, 2010, the H-1B extension was filed. 3 weeks later, our client informed us that new ownership has taken over the petitioner. They were wondering if the filing fees submitted were useless as they assumed an amendment should now be filed. Our office assured them that no amendment is needed and sent a letter together with a citation of INA § 214(c)(10) which specifically addressed this issue. On June 16, 2010, with no Requests for Evidence by the CIS addressing the issue of whether the position was a specialty occupation, our client’s 3-year H-1B extension was approved.

FREE CONSULTATIONS

If you have any questions, please fill out the free consultation form below, and we will respond as soon as possible privately. 

{ Comments on this entry are closed }