EB Category Roll-Over and PWMB Demand Estimation from I-485 Receipt Data

We analyzed I-485 Approvals and Receipts for FY 2011 to estimate carry-over demand from FY 2011 in EB category. We also used this data in conjunction with USCIS I-485 Performance data and  I-485 representative filings from June to September 2011 at trackitt to estimate People Who Missed the Boat (PWMB) demand for EB2-IC upto September 2011 that may  start consuming visa numbers from FY 2012 annual allocation and/or spillover. Please note PWMB demand is only upto cut-off date of 15 April 2007 that last became current until September 2011. 

 

We used I-485 Performance data from USCIS website to estimate representation of Employment-Based cases from the total I-485 cases filed at USCIS service centers. Please note that all the listed cases are filed at Texas Service Center or Nebraska Service Center as per instruction on I-485 form. Family-Based I-485 Cases are filed at Chicago Lock Box and then respectively forwarded to local field offices for processing.

Based on above data, we can safely assume that from time to time Employment-Based Category representation is around 27% of total I-485 cases received at USCIS Service Centers (TSC and NSC). Now if we assume that this percent representation also held true during June to September 2011, we can use I-485 Receipt data to estimate roll-over demand from EB1 and EB2-ROW to FY 2011, and  calculate PWMB cases upto 15 April 2007 that will become documentarily qualified now until January 2012 which will take visa allocations from FY 2012.

Using assumption of 27%, we estimated that out of 73900 I-485 cases received by USCIS, atleast 19,953 cases were filed in Employment-Based category. We then used data from trackitt.com to get distribution of I-485 cases filed since June 2011 to September 2011 at USCIS. Some assumptions were made for EB2-IC representation on trackitt compared to other categories. Distribution for each assumption is tabulated below. 

Above analysis suggest that backlogged carry-over EB1 and EB2-ROW demand from FY 2011 to FY 2012 is huge and will definitely affect spillover in case similar trend is continued. 2X-3X representation of EB2-IC on trackitt looks more realistic and estimated carry-over PWMBs that may start using visa numbers from November -February at NSC and TSC can be anywhere from 3,500-4,800. In case numbers are less than suggested above, then retrospectively it would mean more demand for EB1 and EB2-ROW. One way or other this will affect total spillover that EB2-IC would receive for FY 2012. Apart from this, there are lot more PWMBs that may became eligible since October 1, 2011.

We can arrive at similar demand for PWMB upto 15 April 2007 after using I-485 inventory released data until October 2011. Estimation comes around 4,136 + 8,965 - 8,000 = 5,101. In reality actual numbers can be less but we should still keep track of PWMB cases from FY 2011 that still are not approved at USCIS. Approvals on trackitt look far less than hoped for. Although we still believe some movement may happen for EB2-IC in next bulletin but outlook for EB2-IC based on spillover looks less optimistic. Only reason we believe some more movement may happen is because this is first year when USCIS wlll really have to approve total 140K - CP cases in an year (apart from HR 3012 scenario). So far USCIS always relied on pre-adjudicated cases to reach their annual target. More cases pending at USCIS means more clean cases ready by end of the year for approvals. In case such approvals are not possible then CP cases are only hope for DOS.

Apart from above estimation, please note that cases filed at NSC from May 2011 are comparatively more than those filed at TSC. It may be that with time, TSC and NSC processing times would start aligning and I-485 approvals could eventually take anywhere from 5-6 months at both centers.

December 2011 Visa Bulletin Predictions - EB Category

December Visa Bulletin will be the third bulletin for FY 2012.  Here is the prediction for December 2011 Visa Bulletin. We should see following movements in each category as long as USCIS/DOS would use visa numbers for each category as per statutory allocations.

December 2011 Visa Bulletin Predictions

• EB3- China could advance to 08 September 2004
• EB3 – ROW, EB3-Philippines, and EB3-Mexico could advance to 15-Jan-2006.
• EB2 will be current for ROW, Mexico and Philippines.
• EB3-India could advance to 01 August 2002.
• EB2-India and EB2-China could see 3-6 months in coming bulletins.  It is not possible to estimate movement for EB2-IC based on available demand and calculations. Movement is solely based on DOS/USCIS’ policy to intake new demand for FY 2012. At this time, total movement as huge as 3-6 months in one or two steps in coming month(s) cannot be discarded before we may see retrogression. In next few bulletins, dates can move anywhere from Jan 2008 – June 2008. Although DOS warned about stall, they may (should) not stall current movement as such movement may not consume visas until these applications will become documentarily qualified.

Note – Predictions are based on educated guess and is not guaranteed. Please take it with a grain of salt.

November 2011 Visa Bulletin Predictions - EB Category

November Visa Bulletin will be the second bulletin for FY 2012.  Here is the prediction for November 2011 Visa Bulletin. We should see following movements in each category as long as USCIS/DOS would use visa numbers for each category as per statutory allocations.

November 2011 Visa Bulletin Predictions

October 2011 Visa Bulletin Predictions - EB Category

October Visa Bulletin will be the first bulletin for FY 2012. As with every October visa bulletin for new fiscal year, retrogression can never be discounted. Here is the prediction for October 2011 Visa Bulletin. We should see following movements in each category as long as USCIS/DOS would use visa numbers for each category as per statutory allocations.

EB1 Statistics for I-140 Approval and Denial for FY 2010 and FY 2011

Here are the recent EB1 statistics released by AILA until July 19th, 2011  for receipts, approval, denials and RFE for FY 2011 and FY 2010.

EB1- Statistics for FY 2010 and FY 2011

EB1 - DHS Statistics based on Primary and Derivative applicants for FY 2010

From FY 2011 statistics it looks there are almost 8,712 approvals so far until July 2011. If we will consider that the similar family size or Primary to Dependent ratio as FY 2010 is assumed, i.e. 2.39, full year FY 2011 consumption for EB1 for FY 2011 becomes,

FY 2011 Consumption EB-1 = ( 8712 * 2.39 * 12 months )/ 9.5 months (until July 2011) 
                                             = 26,301

So this leaves, 40,000 -26,301 = 13,699 as unused visa numbers for spillover. We know out of these 12K is already used. So in all we can expect only 2000-3000 for September visa bulletin for FY 2011. Expectation from EB1 is very little for the next bulletin.

 

Understanding Section 245(k) to use it for Derivative applicants after Primary’s I-485 approval

Common question asked by many primary I-485 applicants who had previously filed I-485 Adjustment of Status (AOS) application, which is still pending with USCIS,  is about adding their spouses or children (derivatives) to their pending I-485 application. Since for some oversubscribed countries cut-off dates tend to retrogress, such derivatives can only be added to their I-485 case after their priority dates become current again. At this point there is always a concern among the petitioner that their case will be approved before their derivatives application would reach USCIS. Most of these derivatives during this time are on non-immigrant status like (H4, F4, J4 etc) and can become out of status as soon as primary applicants I-485 is approved.

Under such cases individual can still file I-485 application for adjustment of status under Section 245(k) of INA. In order to use Section 245(k) for a case where Primary applicant is approved before derivative applicants file reaches USCIS, these two following criteria should be met :

•  Primary applicant should be married to spouse or be father/mother of a derivative child before I-485 approval.

• Derivative applicants should have last entered in US lawfully on a non-immigrant status and has since their last lawful admission to the United States have not, for an aggregate period of more than 180 days violated their status. (see below for details)

 

Understanding Section 245(k) and how it can be used?

Family and employment-based immigrants have 3 ways to apply for adjustment of status:

• 245(a) – The general adjustment of status provision which requires continual maintenance of status since arrival. 

• 245(i) – This provision allows an adjustment of status application to be filed by a “grandfathered” alien.  

• 245(k) – Preserves eligibility under 245(a) for employment- based immigrants with certain status violations that might otherwise bar adjustment. 

In general, Section 245(a) allows an admissible alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States to apply for permanent resident status from within the United States if the alien is the beneficiary of an approved immigrant visa petition and has an immigrant visa number immediately available.

Section 245(c) establishes eight (8) bars to adjustment under Section 245(a). For certain employment-based adjustment applicants, section 245(k) grants relief from three (3) of those bars: sections 245(c)(2), (c)(7) and (c)(8). Section 245(k), however, does not provide an exemption from any other basis of ineligibility, such as entry without inspection or any ground of inadmissibility.

 Section 245 (k)

 

(d) Section 245(k) of the Act: Exemptions to the 245(c)(2), (c)(7) and (c)(8) Bars to Adjustment for Certain Employment-Based Adjustment of Status Applicants.

(1) General Provisions. Section 245(k) can render the normal bars to adjustment of status found in section 245(c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) inapplicable to certain employment-based adjustment of status applicants who, since their last lawful admission to the United States have not, for an aggregate period of more than 180 days: 

(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status; ( violation as per 245(c)(7) )

(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; ( violation as per 245(c)(2) ) or

(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of his or her admission (violation as per 245(c)(8) )

  

(2) Applicability. The following classes of employment-based adjustment of status applicants under section 245(a) are eligible for relief under 245(k):

(A)  An alien who is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission and whose adjustment of status application is based on an approved immigrant petition for them as the beneficiary in one of the following classifications:

• EB-1: aliens of extraordinary ability, outstanding professors and researchers, and certain multinational managers and executives;
• EB-2: aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability;
• EB-3: skilled workers, professionals, and other workers; or 
• EB-4: religious workers described in section 101(a)(27)(C) of the Act only.

 Other employment-based immigrant classifications and other immigrant classifications are not a basis for consideration under section 245(k).

(B)  An eligible derivative of an alien described in 2 (A) may benefit from section 245(k) in his or her own right if he or she has failed to maintain continuously a lawful status, worked without authorization, or otherwise violated the terms and conditions of his or her admission for an aggregate of 180 days or less pursuant to a lawful admission.

(3) Application Process. An alien must properly file an adjustment of status application under section 245(a) in accordance with 8 CFR 245.2 and 103.2. An applicant invoking 245(k) is not required to submit additional application forms or payment of a penalty surcharge. Thus, it is the responsibility of USCIS to determine section 245(k) applicability based on the evidence submitted in support of the adjustment of status application. To the extent evidence is deficient or absent, USCIS may issue a request(s) for evidence or notice of intent to deny asking for specific evidence in support of eligibility for relief under section 245(k).

 (4) Counting against the 180 days timeframe in (d)(1).

(A) General Guidelines. If the adjudicator determines that an employment-based adjustment of status applicant described in (d)(2) above is subject to any of the bars to adjustment of status set forth in Sections 245(c)(2), (c)(7), or (c)(8), then the adjudicator must determine whether the aggregate period in which the alien failed to continuously maintain lawful status, worked without authorization, or otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission since the date of alien’s last lawful admission to the United States is 180 days or less.

The guidance below describes the periods of time to be examined for purposes of calculating time against the 180-day period.

• The adjudicator must only examine the period from the date of the alien’s last lawful admission to the United States and must not count violations that occurred before the alien’s last lawful admission.
• An alien, however, who entered the United States pursuant to an advance parole document is not “lawfully admitted,” because the parole is not a final act with respect to admission. Thus, reentry based on a parole or advance parole does not start the clock over for the purpose of section 245(k).
• An alien may be subject to more than one bar or violation described in section 245(k)(2) at the same time. For example, an alien in B-2 status who worked without authorization will also have violated a lawful status and failed to maintain continuously a lawful status. USCIS reads the phrase “aggregate period exceeding 180 days” in section 245(k)(2) to refer to the total of all three types of violations rather than permit up to 180 days of each type of violation. Accordingly, the aggregate 180 day period must be calculated by adding together any and all days in which there is one or more of the violations, and each day in which one or more of these violations existed must be counted as one day. If USCIS reads section 245(k) to permit up to 180 days of each type of violation an alien could potentially accrue more than 180 total days of violations and remain eligible for adjustment of status. USCIS holds that the statute was not intended to permit such egregious violations.

(B) Engaged in Unauthorized Employment

(1) General. “Unauthorized employment” means any service or labor performed by an alien for an employer within the United States that is not authorized under 8 CFR 274a.12(a), (b), or (c) or exceeds the authorized period of employment. The filing of an adjustment of status application does not, in itself, authorize employment or excuse unauthorized employment, and accordingly the filing of an adjustment of status application will not stop the counting period of unauthorized employment. Therefore, all periods of unauthorized employment since the date of the alien’s last lawful admission, including any periods after the filing of an application for adjustment of status, must be counted until the date of the adjudication of the pending adjustment of status application. 

• With respect to engaging in unlawful employment, the count commences on the first date of the unauthorized employment and continues until the date the unauthorized employment ended, the date an employment authorization document (EAD) is approved, or the date the pending adjustment of status application is adjudicated. 

• It is completely within the control of the alien as to whether he or she engages in employment without authorization and, as stated above, the filing of an application for adjustment of status does not automatically authorize employment in the United States. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to accrue days of unauthorized employment against the 180 day period after the filing of the application for adjustment of status. To hold otherwise would not only reward an alien for engaging in unauthorized employment but it would also effectively eliminate the incentive and the need for an alien to maintain a valid employment authorization document in connection with the pending application for adjustment of status. Unlike an alien who has failed to maintain lawful nonimmigrant status, an alien who has worked without authorization may unilaterally avoid the accrual of additional days counted against such violation by simply terminating the unauthorized employment. 

• An alien’s engagement in unauthorized employment is dependent upon the existence of the alien’s employment or employer-employee relationship rather than simply the number of days the alien actually works or claims to have worked. Each day an alien engaged in unauthorized employment must be counted against the 180-day period regardless of whether or not the alien unlawfully worked a few hours on a given day, a part-time schedule, or a full-time schedule with leave benefits and weekend and holidays off. Absent evidence of interruptions in unauthorized employment, the adjudicator must consider each day since the date the unauthorized employment began as a day of unauthorized work regardless of the work schedule agreed to or maintained by the alien for the particular employer. For example, if an alien worked without authorization for four hours a day Monday through Friday throughout the month of April, all 30 days for that month must be counted as unauthorized employment. 

• For periods in which it appears that the alien has engaged in unauthorized employment, the alien bears the burden of establishing that any such periods were authorized or that he or she did not in fact engage in unauthorized employment. In addition, an alien who works without authorization after filing for adjustment of status will not stop the clock by departing the United States and re-entering pursuant to a valid advance parole document.

(2) Special Considerations. For purposes of section 245(c)(8) of the Act, an alien is not considered to be engaged in unauthorized employment while his or her properly filed adjustment of status application is pending final adjudication, if: 

• The alien has obtained permission from USCIS to engage in employment based on his or her pending adjustment of status application and such authorization remains valid; or 

• The alien had been granted employment authorization prior to the filing of the adjustment of status application and such authorization does not expire while the adjustment of status application is pending.

 (C) Failed to Maintain a Lawful Status and/or Violated the Terms of a Non immigrant Visa. 

(1) General. Expiration, revocation, or violation of status puts a nonimmigrant out of status, and the alien remains out of status until some adjudication restores status or the alien departs the United States. 

In most cases, the 180-day counting period commences on the date the alien’s status expires, is revoked, or is violated following the alien’s most recent admission. In addition, with the exception of a dual intent nonimmigrant, a nonimmigrant is only required to maintain his or her nonimmigrant status until the time he or she properly files an adjustment of status application with USCIS, because most nonimmigrants who apply for adjustment of status are presumed to be intending immigrants and are no longer eligible to maintain a nonimmigrant status. 

Therefore, for purposes of the 180-day counting period, calculation of the number of days for failing to maintain status or violating a nonimmigrant visa will stop as of the date USCIS receives a properly filed adjustment of status application. 

Not withstanding, a properly filed adjustment of status application, in and of itself, does not accord lawful status or cure any violation of a nonimmigrant visa. For example, if an alien applied for adjustment of status three days prior to the expiration of his or her nonimmigrant status and the adjustment of status application was eventually denied, the alien will not be considered to be in lawful status after the expiration of the nonimmigrant status. Consequently, if the same alien files a second application for adjustment of status, the period after which the nonimmigrant status expired and during which the first adjustment of status application was pending counts against the 180-day period when considering eligibility for relief under 245(k) in the adjudication of the second adjustment of status application.

(2) Special Considerations. The adjudicator must consider the following when calculating the number of days an alien has failed to maintain a lawful status or violated the terms of a nonimmigrant visa. 

• The regulations define “lawful immigration status” at 8 CFR 245.1(d)(1). In examining any period where an application for extension of stay (EOS) or change of status (COS) was ultimately approved, the period during which the EOS or COS had been pending would be considered, in retrospect, a period in which the alien was in a lawful non-immigrant status regardless of whether the EOS or COS application was timely or untimely filed. The period would not be disqualifying for section 245(c) purposes, and the period would not count against any 180-day period under section 245(k).

• The period during which an alien has a pending EOS, COS, or adjustment of status application does not constitute, in and of itself, a period in which the alien is in a lawful “status.” 

• A period of unlawful status found to result only from a “technical violation” or through no fault of the applicant, as described in 8 CFR 245.1(d)(2), does not invoke the 245(c)(2) bar. Thus, such period does not count against the 180-day period. 

• An alien who complies with all the terms and conditions of his or her non-immigrant status does not violate the terms of such status merely by properly filing an adjustment of status application, provided the filing occurred before the alien’s non-immigrant status expired. 

• An F (student) or J (exchange visitor) non-immigrant is considered in “status” for such authorized period of time before and after completion of his or her educational objective or program in accordance with 8 CFR 214.2(f) and 8 CFR 214.2(j), respectively, provided that the F or J non-immigrant has not violated the terms and conditions of his or her status. 

• A reinstatement of F status under 8 CFR 214.2(f) or J status under 22 CFR 62.45 cures time out of or in violation of status only for the particular period of time covered by the reinstatement, so that such period does not count against the 180-day period.

(5) Effect of 245(k) Exemption. A determination of eligibility under section 245(k) renders inapplicable the normal bars to adjustment found in section 245(c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8). Section 245(k), however, does not provide an exemption from any other basis of ineligibility, such as entry without inspection or any ground of inadmissibility.

I-140 and I-485 Approval Rate and Updated GC Calculator

Here is the summarized information on annual I-140 and I-485 percentage approval rate for different service centers. This data is solely taken from published data on website - http://www.immigrationwatch.com/uscis-processing-statistics.html ,and is just tabulated and presented here in different format. We have updated our green calculator to include I-140 conversion rate based on this data, Green Calculator, thus will not assume 100% I-140 approval rate for approved PERMs . This conversion rate is only used for calculation for any cut-off dates which are beyond July 2007.  For any priority date which is after or on October of the particular year, calculator will use the percentage approval rate value from the next year, thus assuming PERM approval time of 90 days.

Tabulated list below also considered volume of applications received at NSC and TSC in order to arrive at average I-140 and I-485 approval percentage, and succesively used those values to calculate 'rolling successive percentage'. Green Card calculator will use 'rolling successive average' to arrive at reduced number of applicants before your priority date to calculate estimated wait time. System will recommend I-140 conversion rate for each priority date.

I-140 conversion rate is also an 'USER ENTERED' entry where you can input values in 'Percentage' only. For e.g. If you will assume percentage as '75', entered value should be '0.75' or '75%'.

I-140 and I-485 Approval Rate for diffferent Service Centers



Click Picture to Enlarge



Click Picture to Enlarge

Click Here to Check Updated Green Card Calculator

 

Source - http://www.immigrationwatch.com/uscis-processing-statistics.html

PERM Processing Times as of May 31, 2011

DOL recently released current PERM processing times. There is great reduction in audit cases. Compared to last month audit case processing time has moved from December 2009. to August 2010. Improvement by leaps and bounds. Huge reduction in inventory. DOL has started processing cases from April 2011. On average expect wait-time of 60 days for PERM approval. We expect that audit case processing times will improve until January 2011 by next month and then will keep pace with regular approvals with audit cases taking on average just 6 months.

PERM Processing Times as of May 31, 2011

• Analyst Reviews: April 2011


• Audits: July-August 2010


• Standard Appeals: Octoberer 2008


• Government Error Appeals: Current

July 2011 Visa Bulletin and EB Category Movement Analysis

July 2011 Visa Bulletin was released today. For Employment-Based category, EB-3 overall saw some movement in cut-off dates for each country. EB2 is current for all other countries except India and China. EB-2 India-China advanced to 08 March 2007. EB1, EB4 and EB5 are still current. Good movement for Family-Based categories overall.

Family-Based

Family 1st – FB1 ROW, China and India remain unchanged at May 1, 2004. FB1 Mexico moves forward by one (1) week to March 8, 1993. FB1 Philippines moves forward by two (2 ) months to April 15, 1996.

Family 2A – FB2A moves forward by seven (7) months to

March 22, 2008 for ROW, China, India, and Philippines. FB2A Mexico moves forward by seven (7) months to February 15, 2008.

Family 2B – FB2B ROW, China and India remain (a

gain) unchanged at April 15, 2003. FB2B Mexico moves forward by three (3) weeks to August 22, 1992. FB2B Philippines moves forward by three (3) months to June 8, 2000.

Family 3rd – most countries advanced to July 2003; Philippines moves to March 1992; Mexico stayed at 15 November 1992.

Family 4th – most countries stalled at January or March 2000; Philippines advanced to 1 5May 1988; Mexico advanced to March 1996.

Employment-Based

Employment 1st – still current in all categories

Employment 2nd – EB-2 ROW (Rest of World), Mexico and Philippines remain current, EB-2 India-China see significant movement to 08 March 2007.

Employment 3rd – EB-3 ROW and EB-3 Philippines move forward by three (3) weeks to October 8, 2005, EB-3 China moves forward by six (6) weeks to July 1, 2004, while EB-3 India moves forward by one (1) week to May 1, 2002. EB-3 Mexico moves forward by seven (7) months to July 01, 2005.

Employment 3rd (Others)- The “other worker” category remains unchanged at April 22, 2003 for China. It moves forward by one year two (2) weeks to November 22, 2004 for ROW, Mexico and Philippines. It moves forward by one (1) week to May 01, 2002 for India

Employment 4th – still current in all categories

Employment 5th – still current in all categories


VISA AVAILABILITY Notes from June Visa Bulletin

Family-sponsored: For July, F2A numbers EXEMPT from per-country limit are available to applicants from all countries with priority dates earlier than 15FEB08. F2A numbers SUBJECT to per-country limit are available to applicants chargeable to all countries EXCEPT MEXICO with priority dates beginning 15FEB08 and earlier than 22MAR08. (All F2A numbers provided for MEXICO are exempt from the per-country limit; there are no F2A numbers for MEXICO subject to per-country limit.)

Employment-based: No Notes !!!!

Our Analysis on EB Category after July Visa Bulletin Release

EB3-ROW-M-P - EB3 ROW moved by three weeks to October 08, 2005. As seen with last few months, EB3-ROW only used 1400 visas from the visible demand. At this pace EB3-ROW can ONLY reach mid November by September 2011 visa bulletin. Either lot of the annual visa consumption is going into approving monthly cases returned from Local Offices to USCIS or these visas are utilized by EB3-Mexico. So far, for the current year as per I-485 inventory, EB3-Mexico has utilized 4010 visa numbers. These excess visa utilization suggests that either lot of old I-485 cases were denied for Mexico or DOS is trying to use as much visa numbers for EB3-Mexico to bring it to current EB3-ROW-P, PD of 08 October 2005, This way they do not have to worry about 7% utilization of annual cap that is required to maintain status of retrogressed countries going forward for next fiscal year. Other school of thought suggests that EB3-Mexico can also become 'U' for last two months of the quarter. EB3-P will have to move with EB3-ROW, no matter what for rest of the year.

EB2-India & China - EB2 India and China advanced to 08 March 2007 by utilizing at least 10,563 additional unused visa numbers from EB1, EB2-ROW and EB5. It is expected that at this pace dates can reach July 2007 in August visa bulletin. In September bulletin either dates will become current or will move into first quarter of 2008. If available visa are less than 24K-11k(used for this bulletin) = 14K for remaining two months, then DOS can decide to stay put at 01 Aug 07. PWMBs will be enough to consume annual visa numbers for rest of the next fiscal year (not spillover). Chances for latter looks less as DOS would like to build some inventory for themselves to have fair cut-off date projection for next year spillover season. Once again, everyone keep your documents ready. Next two months could be full of roller coaster ride. It all depends if B's would Stanley Cup. (LOL ..just kidding). God Bless!!!

Updated Green Card Calculator & Other Notes

As per recent data released by USCIS on May 26th, 2011 on EB I-485 inventory, green card calculator is updated. Beyond this, calculations are extended to predict how many years will it take an individual to receive a green card from current date (as per GMT). In addition to other categories it will aslo calculate number for applicants for EW (Others) category. Due to complication in calculation it cannot estimate wait time as of now.

Data beyond July 2007

Data beyond July 2007 is segregated from PERM data with respective to 'Priority Date'. To segregate EB2 and EB3, PWD minimum salary was used as a basis instead of assumption of 50:50. Ratio 50:50 do not holds true for many countries. Please see table below, which outlines PERM distribution for EB2 and EB3 for different countries.

Spillover Estimation - System will recommend spillover that we expect to receive in coming years for each country and category .
EB2-India & China - PERM distribution for different priority date in EB2 - India and China was calculated. This distribution will control how spillover will be distributed among EB2-IC as dates will progress for different Priority Dates. System would try to average the Spillover among EB2-India and China in such a way that number of years required to reach similar PDs are as close as possible. For each fiscal year, system assumes following spillover. In general distribution of EB2-IC PERM Ratio for different PD year is as shown below. In general, waiting time for Indian nationals in EB2 and EB3 category looks terrible. Since density of applicants per month in EB2-India is so high, that in long run EB2-China will not receive majority of spillover (couple hundred or few thousands). Since EB2 will not be cleared for atleast next 5-6 years, spillover expeccted to EB3 category is minimum. EB3-India will get some indirect- spillover each year due to EB3 to EB2 upgrades or porting which will cause queue to clear faster than anticipated. Individuals with PD close to 2004 -2006 will see ample benefit of this every year. Apparently, if EB2-I will stop receiving spillover or receive minimum spillover in coming years, wait time for EB3-India and EB2-India will end up same. If you will note EB3-India has only 102k estimated demand vs. 165k for EB2-India for PD - March 2011. This whole ordeal is very depressing and visa recapture bill is only hope for EB community.

In addition, you can also put an assumption for a spillover that your category and country would receive every year and see how this changes the scenario. Please see assumptions below. Please ensure that you enter "User ENTERED" value exactly as shown in table below.

PWMB - PWMB is taken care of in green card calculator. In general PWMB number for a PD month is added to the current inventory for the successive PD month. For e.g. if PWMB for EB3-ROW with PD Sep -2005 is '50' , this number is added in PD Oct-2005 inventory. This is done because that demand will not be realised until specific PD will become current. Please click here to see post that refers PWMB for EB3 category.

For EB2-India and China, PWMB is added to the following inventory assuming PD in coming visa bulletin will move in increments as stated in table below.

It is assumed that 7% of the total annual EB Visa Numbers (140,000) are allocated to each of the four retrogressed countries while the remaining 72% visa numbers are available to the Rest of the World. Visa numbers allotment for EB4 and EB5 are considered separately.

Please click Here to check Updated Green Card Calculator

EB3 Category - People Who Missed the Boat (PWMB)

In lieu of updating our green calculator we have completed our analysis on "People Who Missed the Boat" (PWMB) during July 2007 fiasco for EB3 category. It may be too early to see effect of these in current visa bulletin but as dates will move into 2007 these numbers can be significant. On average if your PD is after July 2007 assume 6 more months wait for EB3-ROW, Mexico and China , 3 months for EB3-Philippines and atleast a year for EB3-India. PWMB for EB3-ROW and Philippines is calculated from 01 March 2006, latest PD that was currentafter July 2007, whereas for other countires it is calculated from first available petition.

PWMB for EB3-India and China were published previously but are added here again for reference. PWMB for EB3 category for most countries means they will consume significant visa when PD will reach year 2007.

People Who Missed the Boat (PWMB)
Per family size 2.25 while considering dependents

July 2011 Visa Bulletin Predictions - EB Category

Here is the prediction for July 2011 Visa Bulletin. We should see following movements in each category as long as USCIS/DOS would use visa numbers for each category as per statutory allocations and as long as EB2-India and China will continue to receive spillover as per INA Section 202(a)(5).

Predictions

• EB3- China could advance to 15 June 2004


• EB3-Philippines could advance to 01 October 2005.
  


• EB3-Mexico could advance to 22 March 2005.


• EB3-ROW could advance to 01 October 2005. (Reason for update)
  

• EB2 will be current for ROW, Mexico and Philippines.


• EB3-India could advance to 01 May 2002.

• EB2-India and EB2-China could see movement atleast 01JAN07
  

EB2-China & India FY 2011 Movement Based on June Visa Bulletin

June 2011 Visa Bulletin has released, and EB2-India and China finally had a significant movement that was hoped after Mr. Charlie Oppenheim made a statement about atleast 12,000 unused visa numbers available from EB1 category for spillover to EB2 category. EB-2 China moved forward by two and a half (2.5) months to October 15, 2006, while EB-2 India moves forward after last month’s notable 7-week advancement by three and a half (3.5) months to October 15, 2006. In this article we will like to analyze statements in Visa Bulletin and discuss where EB2-IC will stand by end of this fiscal year (September 2011),

Notes from June Visa Bulletin for EB2-IC movement

"As mentioned in the May Visa Bulletin, Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) prescribes rules for the use of potentially “otherwise unused” Employment numbers. During May the India Employment Second preference cut-off date is governing the use of such numbers, because India had reached its Employment Second annual limit."

There is nothing new in this statement. This was previously mentioned in May visa bulletin. EB2 India has reached it's annual limit and has started using yearly spillover or unused visa numbers from EB1.

"Since October there has been heavy demand by applicants "upgrading" their status from Employment Third to Employment Second preference. The rapid forward movement of the India Employment Second preference cut-off date in May had the potential to greatly increase such demand. Therefore, the determination of the June cut-off dates was delayed in order to monitor this demand. At this time the amount of new "upgrade" demand has been minimal; this has allowed the Employment Second preference cut-off date governing the use of the Section 202(a)(5) numbers to advance significantly for June."

As DOS mentioned in their past visa bulletin that they were interested in gauging EB3-EB2 porting demand and were very cautious before they could start using the unused visa numbers to progress EB2-IC dates. They checked demand for upgrade for first 10 days of May before advancing dates. Seriously .... they thought they will know the new porting demand in 10 days when PERM approval rate are at a year low level since past two months, and DOL is looking more to approve audit cases. Other than this, advancing dates only to 01 July 2006 for last bulletin would have not given them any real demand what they were looking for, unless they were worried about porting demand for PDs from 2002 to May 2006.

So my take on the statement "new upgrade demand has been minimal" is that most of the individuals with PDs between 2002 and May 2006 has exhausted their means, and others who are still working on it are stuck in PERM approval queue.

Advancing dates for EB2-IC to '15 October 2006' in June visa bulletin is a good move by DOS to gauge new upgrade demand for PDs in 2006, and at the same time this allows continuous demand for folks with PD pre-May 2006. In doing so DOS has exhausted almost 10,000-12,000 unused visa numbers available from EB1 category.

"The same cut-off date will apply to both China and India Employment Second preference. Note that under INA Section 203(e) all of the “otherwise unused” numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of the applicant’s chargeability"

As mentioned in our past posts that spillover is used within a category purely based on First In First Out (FIFO) principle regardless of applicant's country of chargeability.

"Cut-off date movement for upcoming months cannot be guaranteed, and because of the variables involved, no assumptions should be made until the dates are formally announced. Should there be a sudden or significant increase in India and China Employment Second preference demand it may be necessary to slow, stop, or retrogress that cut-off date as we approach the end of fiscal year 2011."

We will discuss this in detail below.


What can we expect for EB2-IC for rest of the fiscal year 2011?

Since DOS has completely used the available 10-12k unused visa numbers from the EB1 category this portends that we should expect small or no movement for EB2-IC in July visa bulletin. Any further movement for EB2-IC will only be due to unused visa numbers available from EB5 and EB2-ROW-M-P category.

EB2-ROW-M-P demand (FA)
But recent analysis of EB2-ROW-M-P PERM data for first two quarter suggests that demand for EB2-ROW-M-P for current fiscal year will be around 28,600 + 2,000. If this trend would change, we could see more demand (e.g. few unsuccessful EB1 folks from first quarter of fiscal year trying under EB2-ROW) as we will move towards end of fiscal year and EB2-ROW-M-P could yield no or less visa numbers as spillover. As of now we should expect only 5000 at most from EB2-ROW-M-P demand and as less as 3000.

EB5 demand (FU)
It is difficult to gauge EB5 demand. But if this year will see more demand for EB5 compared to last year, number of visa numbers available could be less. We expect at least 4000- 6000 unused visa numbers from EB5.

EB3 to EB2 Porting demand (PO)
How upgrade demand would shake up in coming months is far beyond calculable. All we can do is predict and assume. In coming months majority of demand could be from folks with PD after May 2006 and some portion could be from those who are currently in PERM queue. These numbers can be anywhere from 2000-2500. These are numbers which will control retrogression or stall of EB2-IC cut-off dates atleast for July visa bulletin.

Now some good news (EB1)
Knowing Mr. Oppenheim he would have never used all it's unused visa number unless he was sure he has enough lying under his sleeves in case EB2-ROW demand surges far beyond it's annual limit for current fiscal year. This suggest that DOS believes that either EB5 demand will yield atleast enough numbers that we predict or EB1 demand has potential to yield more (say atleast more 4000 -6000 visas).

Spillover available for the remaining fiscal year
Minimum = FA (lower bound) + FU (lower bound) +EB1 (lower bound) - PO (higher bound)
= 3000 + 4000 + 4000 - 2500 = 8500

Maximum = FA (upper bound) + FU (upper bound) +EB1 (upper bound) - PO (lower bound)
= 5000 + 6000 + 6000 - 2000 = 15000


Summarizing above headers
EB2-IC movement has potential to progress slowly or stall in July visa bulletin due to porting numbers and any increase in demand beyond expected can cause EB2-IC to retrogress in July visa bulletin. Expected movement for EB2-IC in coming visa bulletins is listed below. If this is it from EB1 category and we will not receive any more unused visas then EB2-IC will not cross December 2006.

AC21 Portability - FAQs and Sample Letters to USCIS

Some people suggests that sending letter to USCIS on job change after invoking AC-21 portability is not required. But this is a gray area, and no one knows it better if USCIS should be informed when individual would invoke an AC-21 portability to change job once applicant's I-485 is pending for more than 180 days with USCIS. In my honest opinion, I would inform USCIS to avoid hassles later on. This way you can avoid RFEs later when visa numbers are available to process your I-485 cases.

Also with release of recent USCIS memo on " , we have started seeing more of such RFEs on pending I-485s, where individuals had invoked AC-21 portability and have not informed USCIS.

Please see FAQs (some we know and others were added as new facts based on recently released AC21-portability memo) and Sample Letter that should be sent to USCIS in case you will invoke AC-21 portability.

F.A.Q s on AC-21 Portability

AC-21 portability
AC21 contains two important provisions that allow:

1. Change of jobs before I-485 (Green Card) is approved; and
2. Extension of H-1B beyond the 6-year limit (discussed here).

AC21 has offered much needed relief to many immigrants in the past, and is even more critical now. Hundreds of thousands of people were able to file I-485 applications under the July Visa Bulletin of 2007, but are facing severe visa retrogression for the coming years. AC21 makes it possible to start a new career when needed or desired, before green card is approved.

AC21 Portability Requirements

The American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21) permits an individual to seek new employment when the following conditions are met:

• New employment must be the "same or similar" occupational classification;


• Form I-140 has been approved, or is approvable when filed concurrently with I-485;


• Form I-485 has been pending for at least 180 days.

Note that AC21 does NOT specify:

• The new job must be in the same geographic location; or


• The new job must pay the same or a higher salary; or


• A new labor certification must be filed.

Important: USCIS has not published final regulations governing AC21. Service centers and field offices have been operating under the guidance of several interoffice memos. As a result, there are still some gray areas that need further clarification. More importantly, USCIS may change its interpretation of the law and take a more restrictive position in the future.

What exactly does "Same or Similar" mean?

To be eligible for AC21, your new employment must be the "same or similar" occupational classification to the one described in initial Form I-140. There is no clear definition of what constitute "same or similar," but a USCIS adjudicator will consider the following factors:

• Job Description: your job duties of the new employment will be compared with the job descriptions contained in your I-140 or labor certification (ETA 750A or new PERM).


• DOT code and/or SOC code: Your DOT code or SOC code assigned to the I-140 based on your labor certification, or an appropriate code determined by the adjudicator if LC was not required, will be used to judge whether the new employment is the same or similar occupational classification.


• Wage information: your new salary should not be significantly different from the previous one. However, it doesn't have to be exactly the same or necessarily higher.

As per recent Memo on 'similar' and 'same' job

How does USCIS determine what qualifies as a same or similar occupational classification?
A2. USCIS generally makes a determination as to whether one job is in the “same or similar” occupational classification as another by referring to the DOL’s SOC system. USCIS officers also consider multiple factors to conclude if two jobs are considered to be in similar occupational classifications for porting purposes (see above question for definition of “porting”). USCIS officers may compare factors including, but not limited to:

• The job duties of both positions


• The SOC code from the Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140) and the appropriate SOC code for the new position


• The wages associated with each position

USCIS officers will view the totality of the circumstances to determine if the two jobs are the same or similar for porting purposes.

What is an “occupational classification”?
A1. The Department of Labor (DOL) uses the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system to group and classify jobs and occupations. The purpose of the SOC system is to classify workers into occupational categories to organize occupational data. The SOC system covers all occupations where work is performed for pay or for profit. Occupations are categorized based on the type of work performed. Additionally, certain occupations are also classified based on the skills, education and training required to perform the job.

The SOC system is organized using codes, which generally consist of six numerical digits. For example, the SOC code for a stonemason is 47-2022.

• [47]-2022: The first two digits, “47” represent the major group, which includes all construction and extraction occupations.


• 47-[2]022: The third digit, “2” represents the minor group, which includes all construction trade workers.


• 47-2[02]2: The forth and fifth digits, “02” represent the broad occupation, which includes brickmasons, blockmasons, and stonemasons.


• 47-202[2]: The sixth digit, “2” represents the detailed occupation, which only includes stonemasons.

47-0000 Construction and Extraction Occupations
47-2000 Construction Trades Workers
47-2020 Brickmasons, Blockmasons, and Stonemasons
47-2022 Stonemasons

No occupation will be assigned to more than one category at the lowest level of the classification (sixth digit). A USCIS memo titled, Interim Guidance for Processing Form I-140 Employment-Based Immigrant Petitions and Form I-485 and H-1B Petitions Affected by the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) (Public Law 106-313) (December 27, 2005 AC21 Memo) instructed USCIS officers to consider the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) code as part of the same or similar occupational classification analysis. The DOT has been replaced by the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) under the sponsorship of DOL’s Employment and Training Administration (ETA). The O*NET system relies upon the SOC codes.

May I still use AC21 if I left my employer before the 180-day mark?

It is possible. The fact that you have left your previous employer prior to your I-485 pending for 180 days is not the basis, by itself, for denial of your portability case. The reason is that adjustment of status is based on prospective employment, rather than an existing one. However, it is still a high-risk move. Your case will be denied if any of the following happens:

• Your I-140 is withdrawn by your employer before your I-485 reaches 180 days; or


• Your I-140 is denied by the USCIS at any time; or


• Your approved I-140 is revoked at any time, except when it is based on a withdrawal request from your employer (not fraud related, for example) submitted after your I-485 has been pending for 180 days; or


• You fail to prove that a bona fide employment relationship existed at the time of filing. So leaving too early obviously makes it more difficult to establish your case, especially if your employer is no longer willing to cooperate.

Am I supposed to notify USCIS after changing jobs under AC21?

You should, to avoid any potential headaches. If an adjudicator has no knowledge of your using AC21 portability, and there is something wrong with your I-140 (revoked, for example), he or she is required to issue a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) your I-485. There have also been cases when applicants responded to NOID with necessary documents to prove their eligibility for AC21, but their cases were still denied. Although it is not difficult to reopen such a case with further explanation, it can be a real hassle and waste of time.

Is there an AC-21 form I can use to notify USCIS?

No, USCIS does not provide an official AC-21 form. Instead, you or your attorney should send a letter to the USCIS service center explaining that you have invoked AC-21 portability provision. Since there is no AC21 application or petition to file, hence no formal instructions, you may decide what supporting documents to send with the letter, such as your job offer, to demonstrate your eligibility.

My employer isn't happy, can they do something to my I-140?

Yes, because an I-140 is the property of your employer, not yours. However, there is not much an angry employer can do if 1. the I-140 has already been approved; AND 2. your I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.

Otherwise, there are three scenarios where your employer may be able to ruin your case:

• Withdraw the unapproved I-140 before your I-485 reaches 180 days;


• Ignore an RFE regarding the unapproved I-140 even if your I-485 has been pending for 180 days or more;


• Revoke the approved I-140 before your I-485 reaches 180 days

How to calculate the 180 days for AC21 eligibility?

First of all, it is referring to calendar days, not business days. Secondly, the clock starts with the "Received Date" of your I-485 application, as indicated in your receipt notice.

May I use AC21 portability multiple times or only once?

Neither AC21 act nor USCIS memos addressed this issue specifically. Based on the wording of the law, it appears that as long as you meet the eligibility requirements each time, you should be able to port your I-140 more than once. There indeed were reported cases that USCIS approved I-485 applications despite multiple job changes. However, USCIS may issue new guidance on this subject in the future that is different from their current practice.

It is worth mentioning that frequent job changes may raise concerns of an adjudicator regarding the "permanency" of your job offers. Although you would have no choice when facing lay-offs or a company shut-down, you should be aware of the negative impacts of "job hopping."

Does my new job needs to be in the same city or region?

No. A May, 2006, USCIS Memo from Yates specifically stated that geographic location of the new employment does not have to be the same as specified in the approved Labor Certification and initial Form I-140, as long as it is the same or similar occupational classification.

Do I have to have the same job title?

Not necessarily. USCIS understands that different companies may use different titles for essentially the same position, and will make a determination on a case-by-case basis. However, it makes everyone's life easier if you have identical job titles.

What if my new job pays less?

The Yates Memo (2005) explained that a difference in the wage offered on the approved labor certification, initial I-140 and the new employment cannot be used as a basis of a denial, as long as the case meets occupational classification requirement. However, a significant discrepancy in salary may be a factor in determining whether the new job is "same or similar."

As per recent memo on less salary, different job location and different job tittle

The December 27, 2005 AC21 Memo states that a discrepancy between the wages of two jobs may be used to decide if the two positions are the same or similar, but the memo also states that a difference in the wages of the two jobs cannot be used as the sole basis for denial in adjustment of status portability cases. Can USCIS provide further explanation on how wages are used to determine whether two jobs are in the same or similar occupational classification? A4. Section I, Question 3 from the December 27, 2005 AC21 Memo provides USCIS officers with the flexibility to consider a “substantial discrepancy” in the wages offered in two positions to assist them in deciding if the two jobs are in the same or a similar occupational classification. A “substantial discrepancy” in the wages of the two jobs may be a contributing factor in a denial when the evidence is considered in its totality. However, a USCIS officer should not deny a case solely because a second position pays more or less than the original.

Section 1, Question 5 from the December 27, 2005 AC21 Memo references a “difference” in the wages to inform both USCIS officers and the public that a difference in wages should not be used as the sole basis for a denial. This means there can be an allowance for normal raises that occur through the passage of time to account for inflation and other factors such as higher rates of pay in different metropolitan locations.

Can I accept a different position or receive a promotion from my employer and remain eligible to adjust my status to permanent residence?
A5. USCIS will evaluate these situations on a case-by-case basis. The job duties for each position, the SOC codes for each position, and any differences in the wages will be the determining factors as to whether you remain eligible. Regardless of whether the new job is considered a demotion, a lateral move or a promotion within the company for which the beneficiary is employed, the job duties must be sufficiently similar. USCIS officers will view the totality of the circumstances in light of the congressional intent, expressed in INA section 204(j), as enacted by 106(c) of AC21, to facilitate job mobility within the same or similar occupational classification for qualifying aliens with long-pending adjustment applications.

Does my new employer have to prove "Ability to Pay?"

USCIS will not request proof of "ability to pay" from your new employer. However, they may issue RFE to verify the legitimacy of your new employer, as well as your job offer. While adjusting your I-485, USCIS will also evaluate the potential of you becoming a public charge. So it is essential that your new employer has relevant materials ready, which may include the same documents required as proof of "ability to pay."

Sample Letters for USCIS to invoke AC21-portability

Cover Letter

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Vermont Service Center
75 Lower Welden Street
St. Albans, VT 05479-0001

RE: I-485/ Additional Documentation Submission for "Your name" Receipt No EAC-xx-xxx-xxxx (A# xxx xxx xxx) and Derivate Applicant ""Your wife's name Receipt No EAC-xx-xxx-xxxx (A# xxx xxx xxx)


Dear Sir/Madam:
Enclosed please find supporting letter for change of employer under American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) along with the supporting documents as stated below for "Your name" for Form I-485
Receipt No EAC-xx-xxx-xxxx (A# xxx xxx xxx).

1. Supporting Letter
2. Employment Verification Letter from New Employer (Name of the employer).
3 Copies of the Pay stubs from new employer (i sent two pay stubs (one month)
4. Relevant portions of AC21
5. Memo on August 4 th 2003 from William R Yates
6. Copy of I-485 filing receipt notice for your name
7. Copy of I-140 approval notice.
8. Copy of I-485 filing receipt notice for your wife's name

I hope the enclosed documents will comply with the required information needed to make an expedited decision on my Form I-485. If you have any questions or need additional information concerning the above, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,
Name, address and Phone no

Supporting Letter

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Vermont Service Center
75 Lower Welden Street
St. Albans, VT 05479-0001

RE: I-485/ Additional Documentation Submission
Applicant: Your name
Receipt Number#: EAC-xx-xxx-xxxx
Alien#: A xxx-xxx-xxx

Dear Sir/Madam:

This letter is in regards to the I-485 application for adjustment of status filed on my behalf.

On Date, my I-485 application was filed based on pending Form I-140
by my former employer, XXX Inc with Receipt Number EAC-xx-xxx-xxxx.My I140 was approved on Date. On Date, I began lawful employment with XXX inc, pursuant to the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) issued on my behalf in conjunction with my I-485 application. I am currently employed in the same field as my previous employer, XXX Inc in a similar position and with same job duties. (Attached for your reference is Employment Verification Letter from XXX Inc)
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 AC (21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition. (Attached for your reference are relevant portions of AC21.) On Date, pursuant to these guidelines, I changed employers from XXX Inc. to XXX Inc, as my I-485 had been pending beyond the 180-day period required by law.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4 th 2003 the I-140 is valid if it is approved and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days even when the employer withdraws the approved Form I140. (Attached for your reference is the Memo on August 4 th 2003 from William R Yates)
In light of the above, I maintain that I have lawfully changed employers pursuant to the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) statute, and that my I-485 application remains valid. I respectfully request that your office should adjudicate my I-485 accordingly under AC21 provisions. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter

Sincerely
Name , Address and Tele phone no

EMPLOYMENT VERIFICATION LETTER

[ON COMPANY LETTERHEAD]

Date

Sandra T. Bushey
Acting Center Director
U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services
Vermont Service Center
75 Lower Welden Street
St. Albans, Vermont 05479-0001


Re: Employment Verification for YOUR NAME


Dear Ms. Bushey:

This letter is to verify that NEW COMPANY Inc. seeks to employ YOUR NAME as OF [INSERT DATE] as a TITLE (NOT SAME AS LC). His annual salary will be $ xxx,xxx. ( ALMOST 70 % MORE THAN MENTIONED SALARY IN LABOUR)

The duties of the TITLE position at New Company , Inc. are consistent with those described in the Application for Alien Employment Certificate filed by Old employer , Inc. on Mr.LAST NAME’s behalf and, subsequently approved by the Department of Labor on DATE. They include JOB DUTIES ( IN MY CASE THEY WERE WORD TO WORD MATCH FROM LABOUR.)

Although his employment is at will, this is a regular full-time position. We expect to continue to utilize his skills in this position after approval of his form I-485

If any additional information is required, please contact me at NO.


Very truly yours,

NEW COMPANY , Inc.


NAME
Senior Employment Specialist

Other Attachments

Relevant portions of AC21
Memo on August 4 th 2003 from William R Yates

Please note this article is put together by taking information from number of resources on internet.