问问evl回复 - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

国际科技财经博客移民网络热点娱乐民生时事公众号

Redian新闻

>未名空间

>EB23 - 劳工卡

问问evl回复

问问evl回复# EB23 - 劳工卡

e*52015-09-23 07:09

1 楼

timeline和rfe都报过了
http://www.mitbbs.com/article/EB23/32454595_0.html
换工作再485pending 180天内（被逼的），原来雇主律师说要原雇主出具一份信说明
file的时候这个工作的真实性。
请问大家这个是必须的吗？
谢谢

f*x2015-09-23 07:09

2 楼

不懂帮顶，同关注

【在 e*********5 的大作中提到】

: timeline和rfe都报过了
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article/EB23/32454595_0.html
: 换工作再485pending 180天内（被逼的），原来雇主律师说要原雇主出具一份信说明
: file的时候这个工作的真实性。
: 请问大家这个是必须的吗？
: 谢谢

l*g2015-09-23 07:09

3 楼

仅供参考，以律师意见为准。
这里是USCIS关于AC21 portability的memo：
http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/S
里面的第10个问答的原文。个人认为你的case其实归到了“However...bona fide..."
那一句，证明file 140的时候雇主的确有意愿给你提供一个PERM上描述的永久职位。而
你也最好证明在file 485的时候的确有意愿去take这个140提供的职位。
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability
cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with
the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but
prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have
ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was
pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485
has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible
to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona
fide. This means that, as
of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not
filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ
the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the
employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such
intent and may
take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence
of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or
investigation may be appropriate.

e*52015-09-23 07:09

4 楼

谢谢

but

【在 l*****g 的大作中提到】

: 仅供参考，以律师意见为准。
: 这里是USCIS关于AC21 portability的memo：
: http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/S
: 里面的第10个问答的原文。个人认为你的case其实归到了“However...bona fide..."
: 那一句，证明file 140的时候雇主的确有意愿给你提供一个PERM上描述的永久职位。而
: 你也最好证明在file 485的时候的确有意愿去take这个140提供的职位。
: Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability
: cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with
: the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
: Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but

f*x2015-09-23 07:09

5 楼

这个Memo和IMMIGRATION PRATICE 15TH EDITION 我都研究过。按照RFE的字面意思只需
要你回答是否还在，一般再列出每份工作起始时间。如果你485申请的时候交了EVL上面
写了雇主的意愿，就已经表明当时的意愿了，个人认为不用再重复，人家也没问你要这
个。律师让你再搞一份，如果可以搞到，就更保险。有的律师交485的时候没有放EVL表
明意愿，如果是这个情况，你这次就要放。如果你已经过了93天，那就拖过180天，用
新公司的支持一起交AC21吧。以上是个人意见，等你UPDATE

【在 e*********5 的大作中提到】